D&D 5E State of D&D

[Shasarak]

I guess if we want to use McDonalds as an analogy, it would be similar to them producing a product that their own research shows 30% of their customers like.

 

[Jester David]

What's the "small to medium" book, the Sword Coast? I still think that's a bit anemic, but I'm willing to see how it goes. Two books a year would be ideal I think,

They also did the Elemental Evil Player's Companion. A couple of those each year would be fine, paired with a more flavourful book (like Manual of the Planes or Deities & Demigods).

but I would really like to see some short module support. Surely a few adventure paths running over the course of the year should be doable, no? Maybe 3x a year, release 1 part of a 3-module adventure? That's where a lot of our great memories come from, modules. The adventure league stuff I'm not really counting. It's not a bad thing, but that's not what I'm looking for.

The problem with the small modules is they're harder to sell in stores. No spines makes them harder to display. The move to hardcover was in response to store feedback.

Plus, you get a LOT more adventure for your money with a big hardcover. A 32-page module would run $15. Getting three gets you 96-pages for $45. Or you could get a 200+ page super adventure for the same price.
And you never have to wait for the next part: a group that plays weekly can blast through 32-pages in a fortnight. Plus, it's really easy to just pull a chapter out of a super adventure and just run that as a module. They're basically a dozen small adventures crammed together. Princes of the Apocalypse especially.

PF has a TON of module support...and thankfully, I can covert pretty easily ;oD

Had. They pretty much release the RPG Superstar one and maybe one other. And they also went from smaller to larger for those, using Pathfinder Society for the tiny modules.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I guess if we want to use McDonalds as an analogy, it would be similar to them producing a product that their own research shows 30% of their customers like.

Sounds like a reasonable thing to do, unless you're committed to having only two menu items for some reason...

 

[Corpsetaker]

They also did the Elemental Evil Player's Companion. A couple of those each year would be fine, paired with a more flavourful book (like Manual of the Planes or Deities & Demigods).


The problem with the small modules is they're harder to sell in stores. No spines makes them harder to display. The move to hardcover was in response to store feedback.

Plus, you get a LOT more adventure for your money with a big hardcover. A 32-page module would run $15. Getting three gets you 96-pages for $45. Or you could get a 200+ page super adventure for the same price.
And you never have to wait for the next part: a group that plays weekly can blast through 32-pages in a fortnight. Plus, it's really easy to just pull a chapter out of a super adventure and just run that as a module. They're basically a dozen small adventures crammed together. Princes of the Apocalypse especially.


Had. They pretty much release the RPG Superstar one and maybe one other. And they also went from smaller to larger for those, using Pathfinder Society for the tiny modules.

I disagree with just "pulling stuff out of an AP". Most people aren't going to pay that kind of money so they can "pull out a chapter and use it". People want shorter adventures because they are easy to run, ready from the start, and you can produce lots of variety. With these big AP's you are stuck with what's there.

Paizo had it right when they created AP's along side short modules and made them all in PDF as an option.

Paizo has it right while Wizards has it wrong.

 

[darjr]

Assuming it's anything like 30% and not more like 3%.

Or 30% then 10% for the next one then 1% for the rest after that

Besides they are producing content.

 

[darjr]

I disagree with just "pulling stuff out of an AP". Most people aren't going to pay that kind of money so they can "pull out a chapter and use it". People want shorter adventures because they are easy to run, ready from the start, and you can produce lots of variety. With these big AP's you are stuck with what's there.

Paizo had it right when they created AP's along side short modules and made them all in PDF as an option.

Paizo has it right while Wizards has it wrong.

Aren't you the person that wants splat even if folks would only use one tiny bit of it? Your argument above is counter to more splat.

 

[Jester David]

I disagree with just "pulling stuff out of an AP". Most people aren't going to pay that kind of money so they can "pull out a chapter and use it".

But people will pay twice as much money for similar content that's broken up?

You buy it because you either want to run it or want to have it available to pulled multiple things out of over the course of years. The hardcovers are durable and aren't going anywhere. You have a long time to pull things out of them.

People want shorter adventures because they are easy to run, ready from the start, and you can produce lots of variety. With these big AP's you are stuck with what's there.

The variety is an issue. That's a time factor. So far each storyline has a very different feel.

But if doing smaller linked modules, the tone wouldn't vary much anyway.

Paizo had it right when they created AP's along side short modules and made them all in PDF as an option.

Paizo has it right while Wizards has it wrong.

*Facepalm*
I'll repeat... again.... Paizo STOPPED doing the small modules. They stopped back in 2013 when they doubled the size of the modules from 32-pages to 64-pages. And then they also reduced them in frequency, releasing a couple each year. If not for RPG Superstar they might have ended the module line entirely.
The modules are basically the red-headed stepchild of the Paizo line. They barely talk about them and they never get any attention. Dragon's Demand was the last one they seemed to care about.

You basically want WotC to do something Paizo stopped doing because it wasn't making them enough money.

 

[darjr]

Paizo does sell the pathfinder society modules. Something I wish WotC could find a way to do. However Paizo has said that they lose money on them anyway, chalk it up to a marketing expense.

Or did they stop this too?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Tony Vargas]

No, you're implying he said something he did not, then arguing those points. That doesn't make him wrong.

Implication is a real thing. If someone says "it's impossible to create a good game that uses dice," they're saying that Yahtzee, D&D, and many other games can't possibly be good, by implication. If you can show that one or more dice-using games are good, you have a counter-example that falsifies the initial claim.

I'll concede that I didn't do that last bit, not conclusively.