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

[Maxperson]

Does that 40% figure take into account inflation between 2003 and 2016? Does it take into consideration rising costs of printed books?

Nope, but neither do his. His just making a straight comparison, which without evidence backing it is flawed assumption.

 

[Maxperson]

Without context sure... but we know that the market after the 3e era dropped to around $12M...I don't see how bringing that back up to the level of $30M with a slower release schedule (than either 3e or 4e) is anything but a healthy sign... that's more than doubling it in 2-3 years. I think it's more accurate to cite the drop in the market size after the 3e era as an unhealthy sign.

You're assuming that the recovery is due to a slow release, when it's more likely due to the vastly better system than 4e was. A lot more people LIKE this edition.

 

[Hussar]

You're assuming that the recovery is due to a slow release, when it's more likely due to the vastly better system than 4e was. A lot more people LIKE this edition.

Sure. You are right that this is all speculation. But again we have 3e and 4e sitting there as pretty strong evidence that a fast schedule isn't healthy for the hobby. I mean they were working on 3.5 from day 1 of 3e's release.

I have zero interest in buying yet another phb.

 

[Maxperson]

Sure. You are right that this is all speculation. But again we have 3e and 4e sitting there as pretty strong evidence that a fast schedule isn't healthy for the hobby. I mean they were working on 3.5 from day 1 of 3e's release.

No we don't. We have 4e as evidence that a bad system fails. We have 3e/3.5 as a single edition with modifications that lasted 8 years and did very well, as evidence that an edition with a lot of splats can succeed.

I have zero interest in buying yet another phb.

Then don't buy one.

 

[Chaosmancer]

So, page 72 on this, can't remember if we've tackled this... subject from this angle, but let's try it.

Is D&D 5e doing good as a product?

Not could it do better, not is it as good as it used to be, not is it better than it used to be, not are you happy, not should it go faster or slower or sideways or if everything should be blue and feature the flying purple people eater.

Is D&D 5e a success as a product that sells and makes the company money?


Because if you have a different answer to that than the people you are debating, you need to cover that basic difference in starting positions.

 

[Imaro]

You're assuming that the recovery is due to a slow release, when it's more likely due to the vastly better system than 4e was. A lot more people LIKE this edition.

No I'm not assuming causation...but I'm also not ruling it out. In other words before I would expect a business to change something with their current processes... There would have to be evidence (of which you've presented none) that the change would be more beneficial than their current way of doing things. In other words even if a slow release isn't the cause... it apparently isn't hurting them either while increasing the releases could.

 

[Imaro]

No we don't. We have 4e as evidence that a bad system fails. We have 3e/3.5 as a single edition with modifications that lasted 8 years and did very well, as evidence that an edition with a lot of splats can succeed.

Wait... for 3e/3.5 are you discussing a single edition or a single system that was modified? Because they are two different things.

 

[delericho]

Is D&D 5e doing good as a product?

It's a great game. My assessment of it as a product is much less positive - that the issues with binding issues are still apparent (at least as recently as "Storm King's Thunder") is extremely poor, IMO.

Is D&D 5e a success as a product that sells and makes the company money?

Yes. It evidently sold extremely well at launch and it apparently continues to sell extremely well - far better than I would have expected at this point.

So it certainly sells and certainly makes the company money. Whether that's enough money would depend on WotC's expectations and goals, but they seem happy enough. At least, they haven't announced 5.5Essentials yet.

 

[hawkeyefan]

So, page 72 on this, can't remember if we've tackled this... subject from this angle, but let's try it.

Is D&D 5e doing good as a product?

Not could it do better, not is it as good as it used to be, not is it better than it used to be, not are you happy, not should it go faster or slower or sideways or if everything should be blue and feature the flying purple people eater.

Is D&D 5e a success as a product that sells and makes the company money?


Because if you have a different answer to that than the people you are debating, you need to cover that basic difference in starting positions.

I think that all indicators say it's doing well. There are criticisms, of course, but I don't think any are strong enough to say it's not a successful product. Not anywhere close to that.

 

[Imaro]

It's a great game. My assessment of it as a product is much less positive - that the issues with binding issues are still apparent (at least as recently as "Storm King's Thunder") is extremely poor, IMO.



Yes. It evidently sold extremely well at launch and it apparently continues to sell extremely well - far better than I would have expected at this point.

So it certainly sells and certainly makes the company money. Whether that's enough money would depend on WotC's expectations and goals, but they seem happy enough. At least, they haven't announced 5.5Essentials yet.

I haven't picked up SKT yet... are there binding issues... I hadn't heard of any.