D&D 5E Wanting more content doesn't always equate to wanting tons of splat options so please stop.

[nswanson27]

In the last thread, when he was given thoughtful, detailed answers that respected his point of view, his reaction was to dismiss other peoples point of view as "not existing" because it was "just in their head," and to state categorically his objective correctness on D&D brand strategy, knowing better than WotC because...reasons. And to dismiss any data that suggested the current strategy as working as "subjective," "half-truths," and to baldly state that anybody who is happy is straight up lying.

Fair enough. I won't defend this going the other direction either.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[hawkeyefan]

Choose: curse the dark, or light a match?

 

[happyhermit]

Buy the stuff they make that you want. Don't buy the rest. Talk up the things you want that they have not yet made so they see the interest in it.

...

I think this is actually a great point. Instead of criticizing their current strategy, tell the world and Wotc how much you want something. This is almost always a more sound approach and Wotc has demonstrated that they are willing to be influenced by this type of input if it doesn't directly contradict their overall strategy.

If there is actually a product you really want, that a critical mass of people want as well (so as to ensure non-dilution of the brand and have a likelihood of being profitable), then it is very unlikely that Wotc will ignore that.

What are examples of products like that?

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

It would! Ultimately, though, I trust WotC's market research more than I trust the amateur market research done by fans on the internet. If thirsty players were a majority, I think you would be seeing a more 3e/4e style splat release schedule. Much more likely, I think most people who engage with the D&D brand are very casual, running games very occasionally, and running very traditional games when they do run games. I think a lot of D&D's potential audience are lapsed players with fond memories of their old characters (who have no need for lots of options), or newbies just getting into the game (and so who are actively put off by too many options) .


Historical data from 2e, 3e, and 4e suggests otherwise. It's possible, but there's no evidence behind your assertion. Rather, the evidence that we know of indicates that throughout 3e and 4e, each book after the PHB sold less and less until they rebooted the line in a .5e for a minor spike and then had to whip up the next edition in short order for a bigger spike. A feywild supplement costs more to produce than it'd draw in sales, since it only hits a very narrow selection of the audience.

I wonder if it may also be a geographical thing.
For example where I am in the netherlands orginised play is a non existent thing.
Also in the area we see, to have a focus on building your own world, and playing a pre published adventure is something I have only seen done a few times.

And when you have no intrest in published adventures there are only 4 real 5th edition products so far PHB,DMG,MM and Sword coast Adbenturer's guide ( and the last of these isen't very interesting if your not planing on using any of the FR lore)

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Sacrosanct]

Well, in my particular case the archetype I want to play was extremely niche, so niche in fact the default class in core had little in it to actively oppose it and a lot of it to actively support it. I guess I shouldn't have expected to be able to play it from day one considering the designers promised "all phb 1 classes" in the phb, oh and that they did an extensive public playtesting with lots of chances for feedback yet they kept the class under wraps all along and didn't bother to ask about it on any of the polls.

I have no idea what class you wanted to play, and why you are unable to and what you are asking, so I can't comment on this.

I know that old players have this platonic stable long-term group going on, but us youngsters don't have that privilege. You are basically blaming us for things outside our control. The game in my country was basically non-existant during the fad years and to date VTM is way more known in the collective conscience. I'm about the only "active" RPer on my two groups of friends and we are a very geeky crew, pickup games is as good as it gets. "Get an stable group" is the obvious solution, and something I wish for, but not something easy to do nor practical and not for lack of trying.

I'm not talking about playing with the same group for years. I'm talking about just a few sessions with the same DM. That's all it really takes to get to know at least enough about them where you can have a discussion about what you're wanting and have an idea about their DMing style.

 

[Corpsetaker]

On the flip side, too many PC creation options put in play too quickly are a PITA when it comes to DMing. Too many class options and synergies to track/remember, too many books to reference, etc.

That's why you set a limit when you are DMing. Not directed at you but people in general.

Do those of you who DM not check your players PC's before the game starts? Do you not discuss what isn't allowed before you commit to starting the game?

 

[Corpsetaker]

In response to your response, the author of this post @Corpsetaker posts a new thread about once a week or so regarding how 5e is a failure.

Point me to one of my threads where I am discussing 5th edition being an out right failure.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*