D&D 5E Is 5E Special

[EzekielRaiden]

Neither of us have data to base it on: WotC, however does, and it is their business to run. I see no reason to suspect that this is not the moderate approach.

"One, perhaps two books a year" is not a moderate approach.

Particularly when we know that critically-important documents, like the edition conversion stuff, got derailed for over a year because one person had jury duty.

 

[Parmandur]

Not sure how it could be, considering the very first supplement was SCAG, an official setting book...less than a year after the DMG was published. Meaning it had to have been in the works before the DMG was published.

If the plan was "no setting books at all," it was abandoned before the game even hit the shelves.

Yeah, you are right. Theybalways said that they had Settings in the wings, but were initially working on a new format approach. Which ultimately became the Ravnica and Eberron approach.

 

[Parmandur]

"One, perhaps two books a year" is not a moderate approach.

More moderate than "None." And 5E has always had a faster release schedule than that, at any rate, neve dipping below 3 big books a year. Additionally, they have sped up the release schedule significantly lately, at any rate, so there you go, moderate change.

Moderation has to do with achieving the ideal mean between extremes, and if the ideal balance is 2 or 3, that is moderate.

 

[Minigiant]

But that's the thing: they wouldn't necessarily are "oodles of cash" I'd they released whatever, whenever. And spending $7 to make $10 instead of $3 to make $8 isn"leaving .only on the table": spending more and having a lower profit is losing money, even if revenue goes up somewhat.

Can you say with absolute certainty that if WOTC released one additional book per year, that the sum of the sales potential books they made in the 8 years of 5e would make money than the cost and time to make them?

You making the assuming that WOTC didthe researchand missed absolutely zero of the big money making ideas. That WOTC did all the good ides already. Something that literally cannot be true because WOTC is still making new books.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

More moderate than "None." And 5E has always had a faster release schedule than that, at any rate, neve dipping below 3 big books a year. Additionally, they have sped up the release schedule significantly lately, at any rate, so there you go, moderate change.

Moderation has to do with achieving the ideal mean between extremes, and if the ideal balance is 2 or 3, that is moderate.

"More moderate than none" does not make it moderate. That is like saying "eating 100 calories a day is more healthful than eating 0 calories a day!" That doesn't make it healthy to eat 100 calories a day. When you are using as an index literally one of the most extreme values you can (because negative publication is, thankfully, not possible.)

This is the "fallacy of relative privation." Just because something is more moderate than the worst possible case, and less immoderate than an antithetical extreme, does not actually make it moderate.

 

[Minigiant]

Weren't campaign settings crossed off the list initially... now we have how many official setting books?? Strangely enough it was also an area where 3PP have been able to and still do flourish...

Setting books where never off the plan. FR and Eberron books came early.

Remember they originally tried to make the Artificer a wizard subclass in order to print no new classes.

The issueis this was planned so hard that the Eberron books risked flopping if they didn't make an new class. Proof that will all their research, their plan was a mistake.

 

[Parmandur]

Can you say with absolute certainty that if WOTC released one additional book per year, that the sum of the sales potential books they made in the 8 years of 5e would make money than the cost and time to make them?

You making the assuming that WOTC didthe researchand missed absolutely zero of the big money making ideas. That WOTC did all the good ides already. Something that literally cannot be true because WOTC is still making new books.

Potentially. They would be in the best position to know what they can expect to sell on books, not us. Could they do better? Probsvltz and they have constantly adjusted over the past 8 years.

 

[Parmandur]

"More moderate than none" does not make it moderate. That is like saying "eating 100 calories a day is more healthful than eating 0 calories a day!" That doesn't make it healthy to eat 100 calories a day. When you are using as an index literally one of the most extreme values you can (because negative publication is, thankfully, not possible.)

This is the "fallacy of relative privation." Just because something is more moderate than the worst possible case, and less immoderate than an antithetical extreme, does not actually make it moderate.

You are simply assuming that 5 or 6 books a year (the current rate the past couple yeqrs, if you count them up) is not the equivalent of a 2000 calorie diet. Fact is, there is a moderate ideal, and 3-6 a year may well be it. Do you have any hard data that suggests otherwise....?

 

[Parmandur]

Setting books where never off the plan. FR and Eberron books came early.

Remember they originally tried to make the Artificer a wizard subclass in order to print no new classes.

The issueis this was planned so hard that the Eberron books risked flopping if they didn't make an new class. Proof that will all their research, their plan was a mistake.

Ehrm...5E was on the market for 5 years before Rising from the Last War was published. That not "early," 5 years into 3.5 4E was being published and 5 years into 4E the Next Playtest was winding up.

 

[Minigiant]

Potentially. They would be in the best position to know what they can expect to sell on books, not us. Could they do better? Probsvltz and they have constantly adjusted over the past 8 years.

My point from the very beginning is that

The shift of demo in age, gender, race, culture, location and other characteristics in the D&D audience during 5e was massive.

It was caused by the circumstances of 2014-2022

WOTC didn't expect this shift. 5e was designed as a coming home edition for previous players.

WOTC did not adjust their schedule enough to match this extreme change. However the circumstances of 2014-2022 was a lo more forgiving than the circumstances of 2000-2008 and surely 2008-20014. It allowed the 5e policies to not be an edition killer.

Other editions would have loved the attitude of 2014-2022.
We'd be previewing 6e if WOTC kept their policies but have the atttudes of 2008-2014 or 2000-2008.