Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 7716141" data-attributes="member: 37579">Agreed. I'd love a book like that and have been advocating it strongly for a good year. Once they started adding PoD material to the DMsGuild it's just become a better idea.You're communicating that just fine. I agree with most of your conclusions.While multiple adventures in multiple settings would increase people playing those settings (and decrease Realms players) that wouldn't make those people fans of the setting or likely to play in that setting outside of official adventures. It would just be artificially inflating the number of players. Short of having a couple adventures for every setting and a few generic setting neutral adventures and allowing people to play in the setting of their choice, there's no way to really get accurate numbers. But that's super unlikely to happen in a single year.My opinion dates back to before my time on the internet. Almost every DM I played with made their own spells or world or races or kits or monsters. To say nothing of adventures.Customizing the game was just something you did. It's been noted about 1st Edition that no one ever played it by the book.That's how the magazines existed. That's how other games came about. Literally the first thing I did online was start downloading D&D netbooks (and Paladium content). This would have been ’95 or so. Maybe '94.Hacking the game is super, super common.Heck, that's the reason there's advice in the DMG for making classes, races, spells, monsters, and magic items. It's expected. Honestly, I think RAW and no house rules or personal homebrew is likely the minority...You gain confidence by doing. You start by making terrible content and learning by making mistakes. Well, maybe because they haven't published any campaign settings yet for 5e. And if they did do one, why would they start with a setting other than the Realms? And only publish three books a year and have shown little interest in going to four. And don't really have the staff to do two books at once, otherwise they wouldn't have licensed out the adventure while making the core rulebooks. I doubt they'd release a campaign setting in April for an adventure path in August.Pairing a setting with adventure is super unlikely.The peak of the D&D fad was the 80s followed by the 2000s. We might have passed the latter now, but maybe not. So there are far more lapsed D&D players out there than currently playing. So you can have a very, very successful edition of D&D without attracting a single "new" players. I doubt very much that the current sales of D&D are spurred primarily by brand new players. New players are coming into the game, but the majority of players still have experience with 4e or 3e, if not 2e and 1e. So you have the core fanbase who has been playing for years bolstered by both returning players and new players. If you've been playing since 3e, you have a good decade of experience now, closing in on 2. Heck, 4e came out 9 years ago, so even if you started with that edition you have almost a decade of experience.What makes you think most people now playing D&D are "newbs"?</blockquote>

Verification