D&D 5E (2024) Is There A New Sheriff in Town?

[Yaarel]

5e can "borrow" many of these Daggerheart innovations, in the form of a 5e "setting" with setting-specific mechanics.

Indeed, I would love Darrington Press to publish this 5e setting. With Crawford and Perkins in house, this bespoke 5e setting can be an amazing product.

 

[SteveC]

I don't have an issue with the idea, but I am just not seeing Daggerheart as that product. It just seems a bit "meh" to me.

To be sure. Daggerheart isn't trying to be an all-things-to-all-people game, and I expect there will be plenty who bounce off it, have your meh reaction, or just hate it. That's another reason why I think D&D isn't in any danger. I do hope that it expands to be another viable alternative to play.

 

[Distracted DM]

5e can "borrow" many of these Daggerheart innovations, in the form of a 5e "setting" with setting-specific mechanics.

Indeed, I would love Darrington Press to publish this 5e setting. With Crawford and Perkins in house, this bespoke 5e setting can be an amazing product.

Reminds me of how in the 2000s there were many MMOs with innovative ideas all trying to live alongside WoW, but 4-6 months after the new MMOs release WoW had incorporated those innovations into itself

 

[Corinnguard]

Reminds me of how in the 2000s there were many MMOs with innovative ideas all trying to live alongside WoW, but 4-6 months after the new MMOs release WoW had incorporated those innovations into itself

RPG companies like to do that too. One RPG company comes up with the idea of moving the ASIs from species to background, and then the next thing you know another RPG is doing something similar. I think PF2 started this trend while also having fixed ASIs assigned to ancestry and class. Then Level Up came up with background ASIs next. I find them to be more flexible than those used by 5.5e and PF2. One fixed ASI and one floating ASI. 5.5e's fixed ASIs are somewhat limiting and tend to IMO make the backgrounds favor one class over another. Like the Guide Background favoring Rangers as they tend to be the party scout.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I am not sure Pathfinder 1st edition was successful at filing off the serial numbers that connected it to 3e/3.5e. If Paizo had been successful at filing off the serial numbers, it wouldn't have been called by some players, 3.75e D&D.

I mean, they pretty clearly didn't even try to do anything more than "Legally Distinct TTRPG That Totally Isn't 3.5e ᵇᵘᵗ ᶦᵗ'ˢ ᵇᵃᶜᵏʷᵃʳᵈˢ⁻ᶜᵒᵐᵖᵃᵗᶦᵇˡᵉ"--and in fact tried very hard to be exactly that and nothing else.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

that would require Paizo to know the D&D sales numbers

Had they even an inkling that they had done so, don't you think they'd have touted it?

They wouldn't even need to say they actually outsold D&D. Just say "based on our internal sales numbers, you, our loyal audience, have made Pathfinder the best-selling TTRPG we always knew it could be" or something like that. The press can then inflate that into "PATHFINDER OUTSELLS D&D" or whatever.

The only way WotC could've challenged that is by publishing their own numbers and challenging Paizo to a battle of numbers, which would almost surely have been bad for both sides.

 

[mamba]

Had they even an inkling that they had done so, don't you think they'd have touted it?

no idea, I certainly do not take them not saying so as evidence that they didn’t.

They wouldn't even need to say they actually outsold D&D. Just say "based on our internal sales numbers, you, our loyal audience, have made Pathfinder the best-selling TTRPG

I assume they had the IC2 numbers, if they had wanted to say that, they would have had a reason / excuse to do so

 

[Morrus]

I assume they had the IC2 numbers, if they had wanted to say that, they would have had a reason / excuse to do so

There are no ICv2 numbers. Just a survey of hobby stores asking what's selling well. Not sales figures, just a ranking, and local game stores only.

 

[Nikosandros]

There are no ICv2 numbers. Just a survey of hobby stores asking what's selling well. Not sales figures, just a ranking, and local game stores only.

If they only have a ranking for each store, how do they collate the info across the the US? Or do they get numbers from the stores but just aggregate them in a ranking?

 

[Morrus]

If they only have a ranking for each store, how do they collate the info across the the US? Or do they get numbers from the stores but just aggregate them in a ranking?

It’s a survey across a sample of North American hobby stores. I don’t know what algorithm they apply to the responses. But it’s not sales figures. It’s possible that the #3 thing on one store’s list sells more than the #1 thing on another but that level of detail isn’t provided.