D&D General The Crab Bucket Fallacy

[Minigiant]

Overproducing product trying to cover everything is one of the biggest reasons TSR nearly folded in the first place.

It was ouverpoducing product to the same demographic and market that killed TSR. They kept going for the same wallets over and over.

 

[Oofta]

I mean, the world is what I'm trying to escape from by playing D&D....

Problem is the world keeps catching up to me.

 

[Vaalingrade]

They really don't.

They better, or the stockholders will get them.

That's the reason for all the problems.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Making claims about something and having actual evidence are also different things.

WotC stopped recording their meetings after the "D&D is undermonetized" evil plan was revealed and, so surprisingly, the public didn't embrace the idea with full-throated joy!

I kid. WotC doesn't care who knows their evil plans.

 

[Umbran]

Being able to doing and wanting to do it are different things.

Again, asserting that which supports the desired narrative may feel good, but it likely leads to inaccurate analyses.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It was ouverpoducing product to the same demographic and market that killed TSR. They kept going for the same wallets over and over.

If you mean overproducing novels, Spellfire cards, and Dragon Dice, yes. If you mean milking D&D with a book a month, like White Wolf was milking Storyteller and FASA was milking Battletech, nah, that was just the 90s, it kept working for years after TSR bit it. Heck, WotC & Paizo adopted the same strategy with 3.0, 3.5, 4e, and PF1

 

[Micah Sweet]

If you mean overproducing novels, Spellfire cards, and Dragon Dice, yes. If you mean milking D&D with a book a month, like White Wolf was milking Storyteller and FASA was milking Battletech, nah, that was just the 90s, it kept working for years after TSR bit it.

I really, really miss gaming in the '90s.

 

[Minigiant]

Again, asserting that which supports the desired narrative may feel good, but it likely leads to inaccurate analyses.

WOTC wants billion dollar D&D.

You aren't getting that by paying lip service to 2 chunks of your fanbase. Especially if they skew younger.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Point of order, that was arguably imported flavor from late 3.5 other classes, including the Binder and Hexblade.

Point of order - not even slightly true for the Hexblade. More true for the binder. But who you pact with was for individual abilities. You can say that the 4e warlock was based on a 3.5 warlock/binder mix - but the fluff of the 5e warlock is almost exactly the same as the 4e one.

Sorcerer as "magic from bloodline" also predates 4e, and we're just seeing a similar sharpening like we did with the warlock over time. If anything, Pathfinder 1e did the most to push it.

The sorcerer isn't "magic from bloodline". It's "magic from [everything else]" of which bloodline is one relatively rare option. The Aberrant mind states "An alien influence has wrapped its tendrils around your mind, giving you psionic power." - no bloodline. The Storm Soul states "Your innate magic comes from the power of elemental air. Many with this power can trace their magic back to a near-death experience caused by the Great Rain, but perhaps you were born during a howling gale so powerful that folk still tell stories of it, or your lineage might include the influence of potent air creatures such as vaati or djinn. Whatever the case, the magic of the storm permeates your being." - bloodline is a possibility but only pretty far down the list of options.

The only 5e sorcerer subclass that has much to do with bloodlines other than as an obscure choice is the explicitly named "Draconic Bloodline". This is exactly how it was in 4e.

 

[Scribe]

WOTC wants billion dollar D&D.

You aren't getting that by paying lip service to 2 chunks of your fanbase. Especially if they skew younger.

You aren't going to do that by selling a book every few months either.

glances at BG3