Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

 

Reread the post to which you are responding: It isn't referring to "more books" as in just that single upgrade from 5e to "One D&D." It is referring to "more books" as in new core rule books to be purchased every few years if they go that route where they're expecting their customers to buy an update in the vein of 3.5 that is essentially the same game but incorporating enough new and even warranted changes and improvements to then ostensibly warrant new books.

Wasn't talking about One D&D like it's gonna be some new books in 2024. Was talking about the possibility they see the market there for people who would buy new core rule books every few years if they can spin it as "it's still the same game because it's all One D&D but here's an upgrade."

That seems a very likely possibility given their talk of just how "under-monetized" the brand is despite the game being as popular as ever and how well they likely know some people are so brand loyal they won't even use anything in their games unless it has their stamp of approval.

One core rule book costs as much as 50 bucks. Even more.

When you could theoretically buy any one edition of the game and play for a lifetime and they know this it would be grossly mercenary of them to do this.

It's always exciting when a new edition hits the shelves. But if they do start putting out new core rule books every few years anyone who was there when they did this within three years of one another in the early 2000s and saw the cries of money grab then knows how it is going to play out.

 OH NO, buying new core books every 10 years! THE HORROR!

Better?

Shootfire, Apple and Microsoft built entire industries around upgrade every five years or bite a pillow, lol.

I would be surprised if they *didn't* shift to a new core books every five years model. Honestly I am kinda shocked they haven't already. It allows them to keep doing what they have been so far -- add in new rules to different adventure books, and then push them into the new core rule books every few years.

Or did no one pay attention to what Tasha and Xanathar are? Huh. Weird.

They have a whole set up for vehicles that isn't in any core rule books right now. One that could work wonders if they got it into the main game. Airships, trains, the rest. Want them, you gotta buy the book, because all you get for the piece at a time is the just the stats.

I gotta go with "oh dear, buying new books every 5 years! The Horror! (and then remember that right now it is every 8 years, averaged, or 10 if you cut out the 1e to 2e time shift, which was when tSR was planning to do a five year cycle already).

You can stop buying anytime you want and just run the version you have. but the creators of the game have to keep it evolving or go out of business so of course there will be new core books periodically and extensions in between - how else can they make money? I get that for young players the costs of the upgrades can be steep but that just means you spread it around, wait a while ( yes this is why patience is a virtue) or borrow copies from the Library (or petition the library to by half a dozen copies of each book so you can take it out). The reality is that $150 for 3 books that you will use weekly for 5+ years is not a bad deal - that works out to a whopping 58 cents a week investment. 

Quote from PsyrenXY >>

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

 

Reread the post to which you are responding: It isn't referring to "more books" as in just that single upgrade from 5e to "One D&D." It is referring to "more books" as in new core rule books to be purchased every few years if they go that route where they're expecting their customers to buy an update in the vein of 3.5 that is essentially the same game but incorporating enough new and even warranted changes and improvements to then ostensibly warrant new books.

Wasn't talking about One D&D like it's gonna be some new books in 2024. Was talking about the possibility they see the market there for people who would buy new core rule books every few years if they can spin it as "it's still the same game because it's all One D&D but here's an upgrade."

That seems a very likely possibility given their talk of just how "under-monetized" the brand is despite the game being as popular as ever and how well they likely know some people are so brand loyal they won't even use anything in their games unless it has their stamp of approval.

One core rule book costs as much as 50 bucks. Even more.

When you could theoretically buy any one edition of the game and play for a lifetime and they know this it would be grossly mercenary of them to do this.

It's always exciting when a new edition hits the shelves. But if they do start putting out new core rule books every few years anyone who was there when they did this within three years of one another in the early 2000s and saw the cries of money grab then knows how it is going to play out.

 OH NO, buying new core books every 10 years! THE HORROR!

Better?

Every F-E-W years. How many times do you have to completely misrepresent what I am saying?

I am not talking about a new edition every "ten" years. I could not care less if they did that just like I've not cared less in the past when that has happened.

I am talking about them using this whole idea of "One D&D" where it's no longer about editions to put out what is really just an update of 5e and then to put out 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, etcetera, every FEW years.

Better?

Quote from Wi1dBi11 >>

You can stop buying anytime you want and just run the version you have. but the creators of the game have to keep it evolving or go out of business so of course there will be new core books periodically and extensions in between - how else can they make money? I get that for young players the costs of the upgrades can be steep but that just means you spread it around, wait a while ( yes this is why patience is a virtue) or borrow copies from the Library (or petition the library to by half a dozen copies of each book so you can take it out). The reality is that $150 for 3 books that you will use weekly for 5+ years is not a bad deal - that works out to a whopping 58 cents a week investment. 

A great way to make D&D inclusive is to tell those less fortunate too bad they can't afford to buy what everyone else is now playing every five years.

There is a big difference between putting out a whole new edition of the game every decade or so and just tweaking the mechanics here and there or popping in some new playtest material every five years because they know those who can afford it just must have that in their books. That is materialism at its most shallow and most foolish. And would be the company exhibiting they care much more about money than they do the hobby. I don't play Magic but those who do have had to learn that the hard way and it saddens me to imagine D&D going down that path.

EDIT: Do you not remember what happened when 3.5e came out just 3 years after 3e? Many called that an obvious money grab. Many kept on playing 3e. Many moved to whole other systems. Many even grew disillusioned with the game and stopped playing altogether. If Wizards are silly enough to repeat that but try to do so indefinitely they will have some loyal customers not care but there is every likelihood they will piss enough people off to lose a lot of money in the long run and run the game into the ground.

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

A great way to make D&D inclusive is to tell those less fortunate too bad they can't afford to buy what everyone else is now playing every five years.

 
3.5, 5th and One D&D all feature Basic Rules / SRD documents that provide all core rules of play for free and provide samples of character options, spells, magic items and more too. Everything else can be homebrewed if you want more variety. 

So I don't see the merit in this statement. 

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

 
3.5, 5th and One D&D all feature Basic Rules / SRD documents that provide all core rules of play for free and provide samples of character options, spells, magic items and more too. Everything else can be homebrewed if you want more variety. 

So I don't see the merit in this statement. 

Not all those less fortunate can enjoy the luxury the internet affords most of us either.

It benefits us to try to put ourselves in the shoes of those whose experiences often aren't experiences as privileged as our own to better understand the implications of just letting a company take a brand they've purchased and think of how they can make as much as they can out of it because all we want are new shiny books and everyone else is an afterthought.

Yeah, dude the whole "so impoverished" is a tiresome little schtick- it is a game. A completely optional luxury. If you cannot afford internet or have free use available from local internet cafés, libraries, airports, macdonalds, and all the others places that offer free internet, --- then you have more problems than anybody on this forum can address and solve and you should be focusing on food and basic survival over a completely optional luxury roleplaying game.

They are a game company that offers their games for free, with only the even-more-optional extras for a charge. It's not the responsibility of any business to cater to the entire population of humanity and all varieties of financial status. Are you harassing every shoe company because they too *gasp* don't give every poor person free footwear with free extras every new design? What about a videogame that gives the first instalment free - do you expect them to give the game and all sequels for free, forever, because some people might not afford those sequels?

I dont think you understand the point of a business.

It's a business. It's not a charity.

I note that I didn't buy a damn thing for D&D for 20 plus years. And still played it. Hell, the only reason I bought the stuff I did now was that I could afford it. My first set of books was a christmas present. It tapped my mom out. in 1981. And I had been playing without the books back then for two years already.

Don't even *try* to say "what about the poor folks" to me, perhaps most especially. I raised five kids, and know what it means to have to stress paying the water bill or buying milk. 

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

Yeah, dude the whole "so impoverished" is a tiresome little schtick- it is a game. A completely optional luxury. If you cannot afford internet or have free use available from local internet cafés, libraries, airports, macdonalds, and all the others places that offer free internet, --- then you have more problems than anybody on this forum can address and solve and you should be focusing on food and basic survival over a completely optional luxury roleplaying game.

They are a game company that offers their games for free, with only the even-more-optional extras for a charge. It's not the responsibility of any business to cater to the entire population of humanity and all varieties of financial status. Are you harassing every shoe company because they too *gasp* don't give every poor person free footwear with free extras every new design? What about a videogame that gives the first instalment free - do you expect them to give the game and all sequels for free, forever, because some people might not afford those sequels?

I dont think you understand the point of a business.

It's a business. It's not a charity.

Apply this attitude to just about any social or political issue and see how you sound.

I understand very well the purpose of a business.

Do you not understand the charm of a hobby that requires a ruleset, pen and paper, some dice, and the imagination?

Bringing out a new edition once every decade or so is one thing.

If they greedily go down that path of releasing the equivalent of 3.5 every few years they will lose a lot of goodwill, customers, and money.

If they run the game into the ground doing this don't then complain.

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

Yeah, dude the whole "so impoverished" is a tiresome little schtick- it is a game. A completely optional luxury. If you cannot afford internet or have free use available from local internet cafés, libraries, airports, macdonalds, and all the others places that offer free internet, --- then you have more problems than anybody on this forum can address and solve and you should be focusing on food and basic survival over a completely optional luxury roleplaying game.

They are a game company that offers their games for free, with only the even-more-optional extras for a charge. It's not the responsibility of any business to cater to the entire population of humanity and all varieties of financial status. Are you harassing every shoe company because they too *gasp* don't give every poor person free footwear with free extras every new design? What about a videogame that gives the first instalment free - do you expect them to give the game and all sequels for free, forever, because some people might not afford those sequels?

I dont think you understand the point of a business.

It's a business. It's not a charity.

 

Apply this attitude to just about any social or political issue and see how you sound.

I understand very well the purpose of a business.

Do you not understand the charm of a hobby that requires a ruleset, pen and paper, some dice, and the imagination?

Bringing out a new edition once every decade or so is one thing.

If they greedily go down that path of releasing the equivalent of 3.5 every few years they will lose a lot of goodwill, customers, and money.

If they run the game into the ground doing this don't then complain.

I hate to break it to you, but the "periodically release a new product" bit is literally the basis of the entire entertainment industry, so the idea that they're going to alienate their consumers by following it just ain't gonna happen. Also, the "apply this argument to something completely unrelated" is a rather meaningless counterpoint. This is not whatever unrelated example you care to bring up. This is people who are investing their own time, effort, and money into a purely entertainment based product; it's completely reasonable for them to want to see a return they can actually support themselves with in exchange for that. Would it be nice if all this was simply available for free? Sure, but it'd also be nice if all the everyday necessities of life were free, but as of yet no one's managed to make that work, so really you're just railing against what is presently a fact of life.

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

Yeah, dude the whole "so impoverished" is a tiresome little schtick- it is a game. A completely optional luxury. If you cannot afford internet or have free use available from local internet cafés, libraries, airports, macdonalds, and all the others places that offer free internet, --- then you have more problems than anybody on this forum can address and solve and you should be focusing on food and basic survival over a completely optional luxury roleplaying game.

They are a game company that offers their games for free, with only the even-more-optional extras for a charge. It's not the responsibility of any business to cater to the entire population of humanity and all varieties of financial status. Are you harassing every shoe company because they too *gasp* don't give every poor person free footwear with free extras every new design? What about a videogame that gives the first instalment free - do you expect them to give the game and all sequels for free, forever, because some people might not afford those sequels?

I dont think you understand the point of a business.

It's a business. It's not a charity.

 

Apply this attitude to just about any social or political issue and see how you sound.

I understand very well the purpose of a business.

Do you not understand the charm of a hobby that requires a ruleset, pen and paper, some dice, and the imagination?

Bringing out a new edition once every decade or so is one thing.

If they greedily go down that path of releasing the equivalent of 3.5 every few years they will lose a lot of goodwill, customers, and money.

If they run the game into the ground doing this don't then complain.

 

I hate to break it to you, but the "periodically release a new product" bit is literally the basis of the entire entertainment industry, so the idea that they're going to alienate their consumers by following it just ain't gonna happen. Also, the "apply this argument to something completely unrelated" is a rather meaningless counterpoint. This is not whatever unrelated example you care to bring up. This is people who are investing their own time, effort, and money into a purely entertainment based product; it's completely reasonable for them to want to see a return they can actually support themselves with in exchange for that. Would it be nice if all this was simply available for free? Sure, but it'd also be nice if all the everyday necessities of life were free, but as of yet no one's managed to make that work, so really you're just railing against what is presently a fact of life.

When 3.5 came out within three years of 3 people were livid.

If they go down a path of doing that on repeat don't then complain when there is an exodus of people sizable enough to hurt them.

No one is saying they should be giving books away. That's just you misrepresenting my point. Just that a model where they release One D&D and then updates of the core rule books every few years to lock people in to buying new books More Often is greedy.

Think back to the days when TSR released new books and new boxed sets and often to A-D-D to the existing game.

Compare that to releasing the odd book here and there but then releasing updates of the entire core rule set with minor changes and improvements every few years.

If that happens and you don't believe people will abandon D&D in droves then I can understand why you're among those who will stick around and buy practically the same books every few years.

Quote from Kotath >>

I am not a big fan of the release of 6e, either, but 5e has been out 10 years, not just 3. And people were livid about 3.5 because 3.0 was so bad that it was felt that 3.5 should have been released for free as errata. 

5e is not 3.0. It is good, standalone, and does not have that same need for errata. 

1st to 2nd was 12 years (1977 to 1989)

2nd to 3rd was 11 years (1989 to 2000)

3rd to 3.5 was 3 years (2000 to 2003)

3.5 to 4e was 5 years (2003 to 2008)

4 to 5 was 6 years (2008 to 2014)

5e to 6e will be back up to 10 years (2014 to 2024).

The trend is going the opposite direction to what you seem to be worried about.

I did not say 5e has only been out for 3 years. I am saying what I suspect they are going to do under the banner of "One D&D" is release the equivalent of 3.5 every few years.

They said they no longer see D&D in terms of editions. It's all "One D&D" from here on in.

What easier way to get people to pay 150 dollars for essentially the same edition more than once and periodically than for them to just add every new UA supplement produced over the course of a few years to a whole new set of core rule books?

This thread shows there are people lining up to buy into such a scheme.

Quote from Kotath >>

I gave the times between every edition change, not just since 5e and pointed out the trend seems to be going back to longer breaks between. 

But now you seem to have an issue with anything new being published for the game at all? 

And as someone else said, this is a luxury product. No players will starve if they do not have all the published material. 

Those times and that trend is irrelevant to what I have said. I am talking about why I suspect they are framing the game as something they no longer view in terms of editions. To tell people satisfied with 5e that "One D&D" will be the same game they have grown to love and what then comes won't be new editions at all! But just the next 3.5 and the next one and the next one.

That isn't having a problem with "anything new" published for the game. That is having a problem with a model that insults the intelligence of their customers and tries to bleed dry those who would fall for such a scheme.

You yourself indicated before you perfectly understood why many were livid when 3.5 came out as a whole new set of core rule books. Now imagine that. But on repeat.

That "luxury product" was played by some of the poorest kids in my hometown. It only took one of us to get together the 10 dollars (1e) or 20 dollars (2e) a core rule book or supplement cost at the time.

It wasn't always a "luxury product." That's just what happens when Hasbro buys you out, the hobby becomes so mainstream it's now "cool" to play, and the "cool kids" whose ma and pa can buy them whatever they want want to play.

Quote from Kotath >>

Objection: Facts not in evidence. You are just stating that this will happen, while ignoring counter-evidence (such as the time between 5e and 6e). 

Correct. It is a theory.

The time between 5e and "6e" isn't "counter-evidence." It was only two months ago you had the CEO saying the game was "under-monetized." By their own admission they want to figure out how to make much more money from the game. Reducing that to "Oh gee a business wants to make money like that's not what businesses want to do" is just lazy. They have said "One D&D" is not a new edition. They have said they no longer see D&D in terms of editions. My theory is that this so they can release updated core rule books every few years with all those shiny new changes or additions from UA everyone will just have to have in their shiny new books. Which is basically what "One D&D" is going to be. 3.5. All over again. Only this time I suspect it will be on repeat. My theory may be proved wrong but ...

They could make much more money from the game just by putting out great modules and great sourcebooks more often.

5e has proved such a success. And no. That's not to say they can never put out a new edition. But they should focus on making any existing edition better with better content to support it. But their design team are just resting on their laurels and pissing about with UA. The company has no one writing for them of the calibre of Ed Greenwood or "Zeb" Cook. Watch as Planescape gets derided for being a parody of the original upon its release later this year. 

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

Quote from The_Ace_of_Rogues >>

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

Quote from Cyb3rM1nd >>

Yeah, dude the whole "so impoverished" is a tiresome little schtick- it is a game. A completely optional luxury. If you cannot afford internet or have free use available from local internet cafés, libraries, airports, macdonalds, and all the others places that offer free internet, --- then you have more problems than anybody on this forum can address and solve and you should be focusing on food and basic survival over a completely optional luxury roleplaying game.

They are a game company that offers their games for free, with only the even-more-optional extras for a charge. It's not the responsibility of any business to cater to the entire population of humanity and all varieties of financial status. Are you harassing every shoe company because they too *gasp* don't give every poor person free footwear with free extras every new design? What about a videogame that gives the first instalment free - do you expect them to give the game and all sequels for free, forever, because some people might not afford those sequels?

I dont think you understand the point of a business.

It's a business. It's not a charity.

 

Apply this attitude to just about any social or political issue and see how you sound.

I understand very well the purpose of a business.

Do you not understand the charm of a hobby that requires a ruleset, pen and paper, some dice, and the imagination?

Bringing out a new edition once every decade or so is one thing.

If they greedily go down that path of releasing the equivalent of 3.5 every few years they will lose a lot of goodwill, customers, and money.

If they run the game into the ground doing this don't then complain.

 

I hate to break it to you, but the "periodically release a new product" bit is literally the basis of the entire entertainment industry, so the idea that they're going to alienate their consumers by following it just ain't gonna happen. Also, the "apply this argument to something completely unrelated" is a rather meaningless counterpoint. This is not whatever unrelated example you care to bring up. This is people who are investing their own time, effort, and money into a purely entertainment based product; it's completely reasonable for them to want to see a return they can actually support themselves with in exchange for that. Would it be nice if all this was simply available for free? Sure, but it'd also be nice if all the everyday necessities of life were free, but as of yet no one's managed to make that work, so really you're just railing against what is presently a fact of life.

 

When 3.5 came out within three years of 3 people were livid.

If they go down a path of doing that on repeat don't then complain when there is an exodus of people sizable enough to hurt them.

No one is saying they should be giving books away. That's just you misrepresenting my point. Just that a model where they release One D&D and then updates of the core rule books every few years to lock people in to buying new books More Often is greedy.

 I seem to recall that there is errata out for pretty much all the 5E books and a Sage Advice Compendium 23 pages long that goes through and clarifies many of the rules for 5E. 1 D&D is a clean up of some of these issues and errata, I believe. I don’t believe that new core rule books will come out every few years, but that’s just my optimism I guess. But I do see digital versions of the books getting updated (not sure how far that will go or if we will keep “legacy” versions. And as they print new books they will have the updates and possible errata that you can access to update your game without having to buy a whole new book.

We will have to see, of course.

5e came out in 2014, basically. 1D&D will come out in 2024 (targetted for the 50th anniversiary). That's a full decade. It doesn't seem like an acceleration of edition releases at all.

I love when people take the “under-monetised” statement out of context and pretend that it implies something that was very clearly disavowed by the interview.  It shows that they got the information second hand from an unbiased source and are trying to feign knowledge of business terms whose specific definitions within the world of business they are actually ignorant of, and generally shows they are here to stir up trouble, rather than engage in informed conversation. 

Let’s be very clear what was meant by calling D&D under-monetised - it means they are not receiving money from a majority of their players.  That’s not some kind of sinister statement - it is just the simple reality of their business.  Only about 20% of players actually pay money into D&D - a percentage that has been relatively stagnant even as DMing has become more accessible. 

In the context of the meeting where the CEO said the game was “under-monetised”—a presentation to high level investors—the target audience would have understood that.  He probably should have used a different term, since it was clear the general public would also see or read the report, clear gaming journalism is full of bad writers who can’t be bothered to explain context, and clear that Wizards’ player base has a long, long history of not understanding technical language and choosing to apply their own interpretations of plain meaning rather than spend ten seconds educating themselves about usage within the specific context. 

After acknowledging the reality that their player base was not completely monetised, the execs went on to discuss that the way to increase that monetisation was not “just keep doing what we’re doing and pushing new books all the time.”  They explicitly noted that they did not think trying to further squeeze blood from the stone that is the 20% of the players would be an effective mechanism for increasing profits - instead, they stated that they needed to branch out beyond just making rulebooks and create new products for the 80% of the game not presently monetised. 

Trying to derive some kind of conspiracy that they are going to try and push a new core set of books from that statement shows a general lack of knowledge of both the statement relied upon and how running a business works.

What we are far more likely to see? A new set of core books, and some supplemental core books released over the years. Which… is exactly what 5e did—you had the main core books, then supplemental core books like Tasha’s or the various monster manuals.  And what 4e did. And what D&D has basically been doing since its inception. 

• People don't have to buy new editions or products when they come out. You can always keep playing the old ones.
• You don't even have to spend money if you want to play the game. The basic rules are free, and the fact that the Creative Commons are out now means that you can continue playing 5e forever. On top of that, it's always possible to try out materials that cost money by just joining a table where people are willing to let you peruse their books.
• WotC is a company and they need money. Of course they are going to give you more products you can buy if you want to. Otherwise, they would be out of business by now. Also, people would have grown tired of 5e eventually and stopped buying products. New editions are really the only reason the game is still here.

Quote from sunwinksoutforever >>

It only took one of us to get together the 10 dollars (1e) or 20 dollars (2e) a core rule book or supplement cost at the time. [...] It wasn't always a "luxury product."

Adjusting for inflation, that means that these not luxury prices are in a very similar range as the luxury prices today.

According to the numbers you give, the money you would have to spend for 1e and 2e are as follows when compared to money now:

1e: $25.43 - $61.04

2e: $36.12 - $48.52

So there. According to the very numbers you gave, D&D has always been a luxury when you actually evaluate money from the 20th century for how much it's worth now. In 5e, you can get products from around $25 to $49.99, depending on where you look. Yes, D&D has always been a luxury. The very figures you gave proves your own statement wrong.