log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E PHB is #3 right now on "Amazon's Hot New Releases"

Mistwell

Legend
Cut a bunch of stuff that has nothing to do with the topic and just distracts

I guess we're going to do this the 'pulling teeth' way.

Question 1. Is there a different version of D&D that you prefer? Is there bitterness there over something WOTC did that is lasting with you?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lalato

Explorer
100% of my group is playing 5e every Tuesday. ;). 100% of my group in the early 2000s played 3e.

Yes, I know it's a meaningless stat. But that's the same amount of data that exists on how many people are playing 5e vs 3e.
 


Zardnaar

Legend
I guess we're going to do this the 'pulling teeth' way.

Question 1. Is there a different version of D&D that you prefer? Is there bitterness there over something WOTC did that is lasting with you?

No real preference but if I had to pick one it would be 2E. Anything but 4E is my D&D of choice as such. WoTC did blow up the Realms and trash Dragon and Dungeon so there is that. THey may have also run over my cat.
 

Sailor Moon

First Post
I'm sorry but trying to compare online services and usage from 2000 to now is absolutely ludicrous and makes me want to tell them to please educate themselves. Amazon was not selling back then like they are now because the populace didn't fully trust online shopping. The online bubble wasn't about shopping on Amazon or Ebay. FLGS and big retail bookstores are where most of your RPG's were bought and saying otherwise is just flat out wrong.

Making Amazon your measuring stick for success is just grasping at straws for some kind of confirmation of victory. We will never know the answer to which one would have sold better online because you are dealing with a 14 year difference which is huge.
 

Halivar

First Post
I'm sorry but trying to compare online services and usage from 2000 to now is absolutely ludicrous and makes me want to tell them to please educate themselves. Amazon was not selling back then like they are now because the populace didn't fully trust online shopping. The online bubble wasn't about shopping on Amazon or Ebay. FLGS and big retail bookstores are where most of your RPG's were bought and saying otherwise is just flat out wrong.

Making Amazon your measuring stick for success is just grasping at straws for some kind of confirmation of victory. We will never know the answer to which one would have sold better online because you are dealing with a 14 year difference which is huge.
Total products? Sure. Books? Not as huge as you think, as Mistwell has cogently argued a few pages back.
 

TerraDave

5ever
"All" these rankings tell us is that the PHB has been a top selling book, relative to all other books, for around seven weeks now. At one point it was the top selling book. And not just on Amazon.

We also do know that no other role-playing book has come close to this in the last decade (including anything for 4E or Pathfinder). We have been told that the 3E PHB sold a lot in 2000. Mearls has said that 5E is doing better at this point...but sales where huge for 3E in its first year. We can neither confirm nor deny that 3E got into the top ten on any rankings (though it does seem like someone would have posted about it if it had).

Thats "it".
 

TerraDave

5ever
Seven weeks latter, D&D is still the top five in fantasy gaming (I think that Zelda book had snuck in there, but is back in its place).

Going through the top 5:

#1PHB 25 overall, 17 in most wished for
#2 MM 36 overall, 17 in new releases
#3 Starter Set 139 overall, higher then when I started this thread
#4 DMG 280 overall, 66 in new releases
#5 HotDQ 442 overall, this seems low, but does beat every other gaming book/product, (hence the ranking).
 

Mistwell

Legend
I'm sorry but trying to compare online services and usage from 2000 to now is absolutely ludicrous and makes me want to tell them to please educate themselves.

Well, that's insulting, and false.

Amazon was not selling back then like they are now because the populace didn't fully trust online shopping. The online bubble wasn't about shopping on Amazon or Ebay. FLGS and big retail bookstores are where most of your RPG's were bought and saying otherwise is just flat out wrong.

I cited the actual Amazon book sales numbers from 2000 versus now. It's not that different. It's up, but not by the exponential numbers people seem to think. When facts disagree with your instincts, facts still win. I've gone through the actual facts in this thread. You can review it, or just pretend you know better and not read it and tell people to educate themselves for disagreeing with your uneducated instincts.
 

Mistwell

Legend
Mearls had said contradictory statements though and he has been very careful how he has worded things. IIRC he claimed 4E for example sold well initially but only compared it to D&D he or WoTC had seen so it is unclear if he is comparing :):):) to 3.0, 3.5 or 3rd ed overall and he did not compare it to something like the original boxed set.

He clarified he meant it sold better than both 3.0e and 3.5e, initially. In fact he said 3.5e initial sales were better than 3.0e initial sales. I am sure someone around here can dig up that quote.

He also did not answer when asked a direct question about why make 5E if 4E sold so well.


He answered it quite well actually.

We were talking about the growth of D&D over the various editions. And Mearls explained to (without giving any solid numbers) that each edition of D&D had been successful. D&D had enjoyed a steady growth over all the various editions. More people were playing D&D every year and with each new edition. And that seemed like good news, so I asked the question that came naturally to me. “If that’s true, why are you scrapping 4E so soon and moving on to 5E?” I didn’t want to keep 4E, mind you. I’m not a fan of 4E. But if 4E had been successful and maintained the steady growth of D&D, it seemed like mothballing D&D for a two-year development cycle so quickly was weird decision. And here’s what he explained to me.

Mearls said that, even though the growth of D&D had been steady, something else had changed. In the prior five or ten years (remember, this was two years ago), there had been an explosion of people in geeky hobbies. More people than ever before were playing video games and MMOs, reading comics, watching comic and sci-fi and fantasy movies, watching anime, playing card games, playing board games, doing cosplay, attending conventions, and all that other crap that we gamers do aside from playing games. It was suddenly cool to be a geek. There were huge numbers of new geeks in the world. And every one of those new geeks was a potential D&D player.

But D&D wasn’t nabbing them. Somehow, D&D’s growth remained as steady as ever.

It’s like, imagine you have a fishing boat. And every day you go out and drag your net behind you and you catch some fish. And each day you catch a few more fish than the day before. Today you catch 100. Tomorrow, 105. The next day, 111. The day after, 118. And so on. That’s a steady 5% growth (approximately). But then, one day, imagine a tanker filled with thousands and thousands of fish crashes in your lake. And suddenly there are a thousands and thousands and thousands of extra fish swimming around. You’d expect your net to be a lot more full the next day, wouldn’t you? But the next day, you pull up 123 fish.

And that, Mearls explained to me, was what they wanted to do with 5E. They wanted to grab all those new players. They wanted D&D to be a simple gateway drug into role-playing games. To catch all those thousands and thousands of extra fish in the pond. They wanted to cast a wide net.

That is a good, direct answer. It explains a lot.
 

Alphastream

Adventurer
The RPGA network seems to have collapsed.
The RPGA name was retired because it had negative connotations for many. While for some (myself included) it had sentimental value, it really turned off (wrongfully) many potential players and meant nothing to the greater populace. It's meaning (a network of gaming clubs) was no longer accurate and didn't communicate well.

When the name was retired, play continued in the same way as before: living campaigns and store-based Encounters. The total sum of those programs (plus other minor programs, such as convention specials and the 2-year Lair Assault) was completely respectable. Any RPG other than Pathfinder would kill to have such a program (and Paizo would like to have various of D&D's more successful organized play aspects). The Encounters program has become a fantastic dependable name, recognized across the gaming space and continues to resonate well with new stores and players.

With 5E, D&D launched Adventurers League, the name for the overall organized play program. Store-based Encounters, Expeditions living play for stores and public locations, home play using published adventures, and Epic special convention premiers all fall under Adventurers League. The program has been a runaway success.

Here's the thing, and it is something your posts repeatedly seem to miss. RPGs are not a zero-sum game. The potential market is far greater than the existing RPG player base. It is possible for RPGs to grow simultaneously as they draw in new players. This is nothing new. Since the beginning of RPG history D&D has been great at drawing in gamers who then try other games. Everyone can have growth. In the case of organized play, Gen Con was great proof. Both D&D and Paizo/Pathfinder had their biggest Gen Con events ever this year! Many gamers play both programs (and many play several other great organized play programs.) That's awesome! Awesome for the companies, awesome for fans, and awesome for all RPGs in the hobby. True RPG fans don't wish other companies a bad year. They wish other companies a great year so all that growth will bolster the hobby and their own favorite game(s).

D&D is selling better than ever. Pathfinder is incredibly strong. Small and medium RPGs are able to launch highly successful launches through Kickstarter. Tabletop games are seeing huge growth. Organized play is receiving widespread recognition in and outside of the hobby. This is a great time to be an RPG fan!
 

Sailor Moon

First Post
"All" these rankings tell us is that the PHB has been a top selling book, relative to all other books, for around seven weeks now. At one point it was the top selling book. And not just on Amazon.

We also do know that no other role-playing book has come close to this in the last decade (including anything for 4E or Pathfinder). We have been told that the 3E PHB sold a lot in 2000. Mearls has said that 5E is doing better at this point...but sales where huge for 3E in its first year. We can neither confirm nor deny that 3E got into the top ten on any rankings (though it does seem like someone would have posted about it if it had).

Thats "it".
I would say the Pathfinder stuff was bought mainly from Paizo itself, not to mention you can get everything via the SRD. I would say it's the top RPG book sold out of Amazon but that's it.
 

TerraDave

5ever
Its dipping a little bit

#4/#9/#1

It is hard to compare to past releases, but through the way-back machine, I was able to find out that (for bestsellers) the:

4E PHB did get up to 33, fell to 54. then plumeted.


PFCRB got up to 369 (and maybe a bit higher, based on what I poasted above), but seemed to stay in the hundreds longer.

So the starter set, which I think got into the top and 10 and is now at 199, looks good by those numbers.

The PHB is something else. The difference in sales as you move into single digits is massive.

Was able to find the 3.5 PHB about one month out. #123.

Very hard to go all the way back to 2000 for 3E...but again if someone else wants to try.
 

darius0

Explorer
This is the best I can find. The PHB 3.0 was featured on the main page apparently a few days after reviews start appearing in Amazon's records.

Check this out too . It states that the 3.0 PHB was #1 on Amazon’s hardcover fiction list on about August 27th, 2000.
 
Last edited:

Customer reviews do not really matter that much either though only sales. Social media did not exist back in 2000/2003 either. People were not talking about D&D on facebook for obvious reasons.

People WERE talking about 3E on the internet in 1999. In several venues. ISTR Kenzer & co having their forums up by then, And RPGNet was rolling. (1996). The Forge was newly up, but promptly denigrated all things d20.

And the mailing lists for a number of game systems were talking about it. There was a LOT of chatter online. It looked very different due to different media, but it was there.

And boards like the Delphi forums, and AOL forums.
 
Last edited:

Zardnaar

Legend
People WERE talking about 3E on the internet in 1999. In several venues. ISTR Kenzer & co having their forums up by then, And RPGNet was rolling. (1996). The Forge was newly up, but promptly denigrated all things d20.

And the mailing lists for a number of game systems were talking about it. There was a LOT of chatter online. It looked very different due to different media, but it was there.

And boards like the Delphi forums, and AOL forums.


There were things like bulletin boards but you did not have things like facebook, twitter, youtube and apps on cell phones linking them all together. Computer use has doubled or tripled since 2000 depending on what country you are in, you could not msg the D&D designers on twitter or watch them on youtube.

Its a slight difference of scale. I'm willing to bet you will find more positive reviews on the latest Game of Thrones book than Shakespeare or the bible as well.
 

ZombieRoboNinja

First Post
This is the best I can find. The PHB 3.0 was featured on the main page apparently a few days after reviews start appearing in Amazon's records.

Check this out too . It states that the 3.0 PHB was #1 on Amazon’s hardcover fiction list on about August 27th, 2000.

Whoah, wait a minute. I think you buried the lede here: 3e was "fiction" but 5e is "nonfiction." This time we get to use real magic!

If only Jack Chick knew how right he was...

Darkdungeons_page4.gif
 
Last edited:

MwaO

Explorer
Total products? Sure. Books? Not as huge as you think, as Mistwell has cogently argued a few pages back.

I remember the outrage that happened last time when people would talk about buying books on Amazon instead of their FLGS. Now it is a point of pride that Amazon is where many books are being sold?

Seems to be a change?
 

Alphastream

Adventurer
I remember the outrage that happened last time when people would talk about buying books on Amazon instead of their FLGS. Now it is a point of pride that Amazon is where many books are being sold?

Seems to be a change?
I don't see this as anti-FLGS or pro-Amazon. I think its simply impressive that Amazon sales are high. And, Amazon is established enough to be important/meaningful. It is perhaps even more impressive, because now the LGS that are WPN members (and who run a high volume of Magic and D&D organized play) are allowed to sell these products two weeks in advance of Amazon. I've heard several cases of people canceling their Amazon orders to purchase from their FLGS because they wanted to get their books as soon as possible. I know other people who used to order from Amazon who know turn to their FLGS for the same reason.

It is great to see 5E do well on Amazon and at the FLGS. I visited a board game store in Belgium recently, and they were carrying the Starter Set and had made several sales despite not normally catering to RPGs. The stores I visit in Portland and Houston are seeing well beyond expected sales. Great news for our hobby.
 

Mistwell

Legend
There were things like bulletin boards but you did not have things like facebook, twitter, youtube and apps on cell phones linking them all together.

I wish you would stop repeating claims that have already been refuted...unless you have a response to the refutation.

Myspace.
Friendster.
AOL.
Usenet.

These were all big at the time. Bigger than mere "message board". They were, in fact, HUGE. MySpace surpassed Google as the most visited website in the United States at one point.

Computer use has doubled or tripled since 2000 depending on what country you are in, you could not msg the D&D designers on twitter or watch them on youtube.

This is another one of those Zard-specials, where you cite a generic set of data that has little to do with the topic but imply it has a lot to do with the topic. Nobody cares, say, computer use in Zibabwe for this topic. We're talking about internet usage, in the United States, which is where the overwhelming bulk of "D&D discussions on the internet" would be found. Right now internet usage is at 81% of Americans. By comparison, in 2000 it was about 51% of Americans. Now that is certainty growth, but it's not "doubled or tripled". We're also talking about gamer nerds - who were the first adopters of the Internet. I am sure the number of Americans online in the gamer nerd community has increased since 2000, but it's definitely not the wild numbers you're trying to imply here.

Its a slight difference of scale. I'm willing to bet you will find more positive reviews on the latest Game of Thrones book than Shakespeare or the bible as well.

Wow talk about disingenuous. We're comparing a book from 2000 to a book from 2014, where Amazon physical-book sales have raised about 30% and internet usage has raised about 30% as well in that period of time. So you compare it to books thousands of years old, which definitely never had any internet access when they released?

Why the constant exaggerations here Zard? It's not persuasive once someone reveals what you're doing, in fact it's the opposite. By doing this so much in this thread, you're decreasing the credibility of your arguments in general. It's like crying wolf.
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top