D&D 5e has failed

[Username17]

I hate 5e as much as the next guy, if not more but is it possible that Mearls is right? That 5e actually sold more books then 3.0?

Generally not. Mearls is a liar and a knave. He takes a lot of time coming up with things to say that are technically true (the best kind of true), and also just plain lies when he isn't smart enough to come up with a way to stretch the truth as far as he wants it to go. See our old Skill Challenge argument where he lost the plot entirely and eventually just started shouting that my critiques of Skill Challenges were invalid because of communism (really).

The 4e people did a lot of weird shit in order to back up technically true claims that sounded like 4e was selling well. Like, making extra print runs so tiny that I've only ever heard of one person on the internet who has even seen one in a store so that they could truthfully claim that they had gone through X many print runs. The 5e shell games started before the books even came out.

They gave people almost half off the cover price if and only if they purchased through Amazon rather than a brick and mortar retailer or even other online retailers. And then they talked about Amazon sales as a proxy for total sales, when they were obviously way skewed. They were paying people twenty dollars a book to support their preferred sales narrative!

When Mike Mearls gives a sales statement with a lot of commas and embedded clauses, the baseline assumption is that he is using weasel words to get people to believe false things while trying to be technically not lying. Because that's all he's done for ten fucking actual years. His claim about lifetime sales is too weirdly convoluted for it to not be a verbal shell game. If he had genuinely positive news, he would have said something simple. Fuck, even if he had said something simple, the best assumption would still be that there's a surprising shell game going on such that the obvious plain meaning was being subverted (like with the new printings of 4e books that turned out to be meaningless).

-Username17

[Voss]

I hate 5e as much as the next guy, if not more but is it possible that Mearls is right? That 5e actually sold more books then 3.0?

Now the Amazon data Virgil posted doesn't support that, but the interesting thing that is that it shows 5e PHB sales are actually growing.

well, yes. But book sales always grow until a title goes out of print or it is so bad that returns actually exceed sales. 'Sales growing' is actually the least interesting thing that could happen. If 5 dudes buy the book for the cover art, sales grow.

[Blicero]

Which is exactly why Mike Mearls will post blatant lies like "3e+3.5+4e<5e" and then turn around and clarify a week later that when he used plus signs, they were secret metaphorical plus signs that didn't actually mean plus at all.

The clarification you posted was tweeted two hours after the initial claim, not a week later.

[erik]

I hate 5e as much as the next guy, if not more but is it possible that Mearls is right? That 5e actually sold more books then 3.0?

Now the Amazon data Virgil posted doesn't support that, but the interesting thing that is that it shows 5e PHB sales are actually growing.

well, yes. But book sales always grow until a title goes out of print or it is so bad that returns actually exceed sales. 'Sales growing' is actually the least interesting thing that could happen. If 5 dudes buy the book for the cover art, sales grow.

I think he meant rate of sales is growing, at least according to an increase in amazon ranking.

[Voss]

I hate 5e as much as the next guy, if not more but is it possible that Mearls is right? That 5e actually sold more books then 3.0?

Now the Amazon data Virgil posted doesn't support that, but the interesting thing that is that it shows 5e PHB sales are actually growing.

well, yes. But book sales always grow until a title goes out of print or it is so bad that returns actually exceed sales. 'Sales growing' is actually the least interesting thing that could happen. If 5 dudes buy the book for the cover art, sales grow.

I think he meant rate of sales is growing, at least according to an increase in amazon ranking.

Yeah, that doesn't hold up as pattern for any book sales, barring Harry Potter phenomenons or something getting shilled by Oprah, or other weird temporary boosts.

What is far more likely is a lack of physical books being sold through amazon (and instead more sales of pdfs, kickstarters and all that shit), so the relative rank on Amazon changed, despite 5e sales staying at a constant trickle.

[Jason]

Just out of curiosity: is it possible to judge the effect of Critial Role (by Matthew Mercer) and Acquisitions Inc. on 5E sales?

[Pixels]

If we had access to more granular sales figures, we could look for relative bumps around PAX (Acquisitions Inc) or attention-grabbing events in Critical Role. We don't though or people wouldn't be arguing about the sales of 3e vs 3.5e vs 4e vs 5e, or about the rate at which 5e is currently selling.

Or at least we wouldn't be arguing about the same things. I'm sure we'd find something to be angry about regardless.

[Mechalich]

It's certainly possible that 5e is selling better through Amazon.com than 3e or even 3.5e ever did. That has to do with a combination of discounts, and a change in the marketing of print books. Amazon.com was just gearing up when 3e came out, and even for 3.5e had nowhere near the market presence it does now. At the same time traditional retailers that once carried D&D books have collapsed. Borders and Waldenbooks are gone, and B&N is a shell of its former self. Local gaming stores still exist, of course, but they know they can't compete with Amazon's discounts and I suspect many have severely curtailed their book offerings as a result.

I suspect it also helps D&D sales that they're basically not competing with anyone. Pathfinder's core has been out for seven years now, they aren't releasing a whole lot of other books with wide appeal. The top rpgs of 2016 is a wasteland with Green Ronin making the top 5. For the portion of ttrpg fans who spend X dollars per year on gaming, 5e is probably something you just eventually buy.

[tussock]

https://www.google.com/trends/explore?d ... Fm%2F026q9

You can't exclude that it's doing better than Pathfinder, it's the name brand and it did make PF searches level off and stop growing, with the market growth in 2015 going in D&D's favour.

But ... it's nothing like the activity of even 4e, and certainly not 3.5. If people are really buying 5e, at a rate 50% higher than 3.0 (2 year vs 3 year lifespan) how do they even know it exists? 3e was everywhere, 5e is nowhere. It doesn't make sense as a literal statement.

Search bumps are basically Eberron, Red Hand of Doom?, Book of 9 Swords, Pathfinder, 4.0, and 4.5. Note that random other search terms not to do with D&D do not fall off, it's not a general trend. The falloff from 3.5 peak through the 4e non-recovery is well know, 5e is improving but it isn't better than even 4e, there's no trace of it outside "industry insider" numbers.

[Voss]

@tussock- I can't help but notice that 'pathfinder' is number 3 and 5 in related queries for the D&D string...meaning pathfinder is inflating the D&D results.

B&N is a shell of its former self.

This is an interesting thing in its own right, as it makes me wonder how the D&D numbers are being calculated. The last time I was in a B&N game section, the 5e books were (sorta- no DMG or MM) on the shelf... as were several 4e books, a handful of 3e books and the overpriced special 'reprints' of 2nd edition. I have no idea how someone who wasn't already an expert (and thus knew enough to not buy off the shelf in a B&N) was even expected to sort through that morass.

Is that undifferentiated mass how 'D&D' sales numbers are really calculated?

Or at least we wouldn't be arguing about the same things. I'm sure we'd find something to be angry about regardless.

Meh. Getting angry about 5e is utterly pointless- there just isn't enough to get angry about. All there is the wait for an announcement that they're burying or selling the line, or bafflingly, a 6th edition announcement.

[Insomniac]

You also have to take in mind the culture is so different. In 2003 fantasy stuff was dorky and geeky and who even liked that crap, right? Now compare that from 2014-2016.

You'd expect a system as good as 3.5 after an underwhelming 4E to just fly off the shelves like hot cakes. Breaking even with 2003 rules after a decade of nerd/geek/dork acceptance and popularity really fucking sucks!

[Windjammer]

One thing that strikes me about the comparative sales of PHB is that the context of the product line has changed - completely.

Back in 2007, I was one of two players, in a group of seven, who had a PHB. The others had nothing, or at most one other book - and that book was not the PHB.

The edition was 3.5, and e.g. the player playing a Warlock simply brought Complete Arcane to the gaming table. It's all he ever needed. And if you played a shadow caster or a crusader, again, you'd have your materials neatly in one book. Which was not the PHB. Fourth edition ran the same model, where - if you bought a book at all - you'd buy that one, and then dumpster dive your friends' books for the occasional feat or item you'd want to give your PC later on.

Fast forward to 2016. Which book do you buy if you play 5e? That Sword Coast "Player's Guide"? ... I guess not. That failing, perhaps... oh hold on. Who are you kidding? There's just adventure mods, at 50 dollars a piece, with perhaps... ten, fifteen pages of PC content. Who'd buy that, if all they were interested is ... building a PC?

This edition is selling one book exactly to every player who's not a DM. So, when it comes to D&D's customer base of non-DM's, is it such a stretch to believe that the new total of books sold for that edition exceed (for some carefully selected, and naturally never stated, context) the total number of one book of 40 available to the playerbase of a previous edition?

[Voss]

One thing that strikes me about the comparative sales of PHB is that the context of the product line has changed - completely.

Back in 2007, I was one of two players, in a group of seven, who had a PHB. The others had nothing, or at most one other book - and that book was not the PHB.

The edition was 3.5, and e.g. the player playing a Warlock simply brought Complete Arcane to the gaming table. It's all he ever needed. And if you played a shadow caster or a crusader, again, you'd have your materials neatly in one book. Which was not the PHB. Fourth edition ran the same model, where - if you bought a book at all - you'd buy that one, and then dumpster dive your friends' books for the occasional feat or item you'd want to give your PC later on.

Yeah, that wasn't my experience at all. It also isn't true. Complete Arcane had a shitload of references for warlocks alone to go look shit up in the PHB, and it wasn't till later that the SRD was available. (Tho players of crusaders could get away with just having the book of weeabo and a web page).


On the other hand, you're not wrong about the problem 5e faces. As a vaporware edition, there isn't anything to sell but the PHB to 4 out of 5 people. Yeah, a few suckers might bite on the reprint (by a third party no less) of the 5 pages of playtest rules from the website, but really, they made one product for 80% of their audience.

Which as a business plan... still baffles me as to why Mearls and his handful of minions are kept around to shit this sandbox at all.

[Username17]

This edition is selling one book exactly to every player who's not a DM. So, when it comes to D&D's customer base of non-DM's, is it such a stretch to believe that the new total of books sold for that edition exceed (for some carefully selected, and naturally never stated, context) the total number of one book of 40 available to the playerbase of a previous edition?

Sure it's possible. But as George W once said:



Yes, 5th edition D&D is coming out at a time when WotC has no real competition other than some dude's house rules for 3rd edition D&D. It's comparing one book to one book for an edition that has 3 books and an edition that has dozens of books. It's quite possibly comparing 2016 dollars to 2001 dollars where every 5th edition PHB counts $50 and every 3rd edition PHB costs $20. It's quite possibly doing something bizarro world with PHB pdfs and paper copies. It's quite possibly a shell game involving timeframes. And so on and so on.

It is entirely possible that the statement is true, for a given value of true. Hell, it's possible that the plain English meaning of the text is actually true. We could be living in a world where there are physically more 5th edition PHBs being read by real people than 3rd edition PHBs ever were. Stranger shit has happened.

But you know what? Mike Mearls is a fucking liar. He lies. A lot. I wouldn't take an umbrella if he told me it was raining. I remember the "hundreds of thousands" discussion, where it gradually came out that every single statement about 4e's sales and popularity were carefully crafted deceptions with the truth stretched so far it wouldn't snap back to its original shape when you let go. If Mike Mearls says something that is intended to make it sound like 5e is doing well, my first, second, and third inclination is to assume that there's a trick in the wording and the reality is way worse. Because that has been the correct answer to every single fucking thing that piece of shit has said for the last eleven years if not more.

-Username17

[OgreBattle]

So how well does D&D5e handle mundane and magical long distance travel

[CapnTthePirateG]

So how well does D&D5e handle mundane and magical long distance travel

Exploration is like social interaction in that it's mostly make shit up. Wizards get some teleportation spells, notable in that you get 3.5 teleport as a level 7 spell and they want you to use premade circles. Skill system is nonexistant. I don't think there are any rules for hazards or getting lost.

[Dogbert]

Wizards get some teleportation spells, notable in that you get 3.5 teleport as a level 7 spell and they want you to use premade circles.

Teleportation Circle is lvl 5, but costing 50g per casting and only leading you to another existing circle, it's rather a trap option unless you're playing a high-magic campaign with circles in every city (in 5E, yeah right, cue laugh track).

[Mechalich]

Wizards get some teleportation spells, notable in that you get 3.5 teleport as a level 7 spell and they want you to use premade circles.

Teleportation Circle is lvl 5, but costing 50g per casting and only leading you to another existing circle, it's rather a trap option unless you're playing a high-magic campaign with circles in every city (in 5E, yeah right, cue laugh track).

50gp for teleportation is nothing. The value of news and correspondence you could carry via that method to another city is easily ten times that in value, and that's not even talking about goods. In fact, there would likely be mid-level wizards who make a living doing just that in any world. Like telegraph lines, railway stations, and airports at various points in history, the rapid development of a teleportation circle would be a major developmental milestone that any new settlement above some minimal size would rush to produce.

Figure you have a city state of applicable size roughly every 50-100 miles in areas of medieval Europe/China/India level development (distances would be much greater in highly rural areas) and every city state has a teleportation circle.

[OgreBattle]

Well lore wise, can you level up as a wizard purely by study and not requiring you to murder things that can murder you?

[Voss]

Wizards get some teleportation spells, notable in that you get 3.5 teleport as a level 7 spell and they want you to use premade circles.

Teleportation Circle is lvl 5, but costing 50g per casting and only leading you to another existing circle, it's rather a trap option unless you're playing a high-magic campaign with circles in every city (in 5E, yeah right, cue laugh track).

The explicit assumption written right into the spell is that 'many' major temples, guilds and important places will have one. So a city like Waterdeep or Greyhawk (the City) will probably have at least a dozen or so, but more likely literal dozens.

5e has a stupid amount of flaws, but that particular spell is quite functional and usable. (and great for just popping the party back to <insert major city> at the end of adventure).

As for the 50gp... you'll be level 9 minimum (or casting it off scrolls). 50 gp should be pocket change. Hell, you can even Greyhawk a dungeon with the spell, taking the stupidly valuable statues and doors laying around- as long as someone can stagger 5' while lifting the junk, they can get through the portal.

[Ferret]

So how well does D&D5e handle mundane and magical long distance travel

Exploration is like social interaction in that it's mostly make shit up. Wizards get some teleportation spells, notable in that you get 3.5 teleport as a level 7 spell and they want you to use premade circles. Skill system is nonexistant. I don't think there are any rules for hazards or getting lost.

This is a bit of a misnomer. There are actually rules for travel/exploration. I will sum up.

From the Players Handbook, there are rules for determining pace of travel and approximate distances for how much ground you cover in a minute, an hour, or a day, along with side effects for things like extended forced march pace travel. This bit also includes difficult terrain modifier of a 50% penalty to average travel rate.

There are suggestions to establish a formal marching order, defining who is in the front, (one or more) middle, and rear ranks. Travel order influences who has a chance to perceive or be affected by various things. Additionally, 'during-travel' tasks are defined, such as Navigate, Draw a Map, Track, or Forage. Engaging in these activities removes your passive wisdom from the general "notice shit" checks.

(this is also the section where the light rules are defined, which are pointed to and point to the Stealth subsystem which is going to function slightly differently at every table you sit at)

The DM's guide suggests descriptive Red-Line travel as one option, or an hourly-granular getting-there-is-the-adventure approach to distance travel. There are suggestions and a table for including monuments or relics in your wilderness (purely cosmetic features with no real game effect other than possibly as story hooks), and a separate table for weird locals (which may actually have a game effect, such as Null-magic zones or Wild Magic zones, portals to other dimensions, etc).

DM's Guide also includes a brief weather effects table, with rules for extreme heat and cold and other weather/environmental hazards. There is a DC table for foraging for food, and a chart determining food and water needs by creature size.

The DM's guide entry for Wilderness Survival includes rules for becoming lost, DC for wilderness navigation.

Then there is as section for randomly generating settlements.

All in all, it's a reasonably sufficient framework for a new gm or group to get started with. The tables are all short, and they're not environment specific, so I imagine they'd get old quickly. They would likely provide a reasonable framework for allowing the GM to create setting or environment specific charts at whatever granularity level they personally prefer.

[Longes]

So what's the current status of 5e? Can we say that it's a failure or a success? Is there any info on how well it sold compared to anything?

[Dogbert]

So what's the current status of 5e? Can we say that it's a failure or a success? Is there any info on how well it sold compared to anything?

In a nutshell:

If you ask me, Mearls can no longer "do bad" because WotC lost any expectations they could have had for the d&d division years ago. Mearls is just fucking around, making pocket change, and patting himself on the back. WotC leaves him be because they no longer care, like parents saddled with a manchild who'll never leave home, they have learned to live with disappointment.

[Voss]

So what's the current status of 5e? Can we say that it's a failure or a success? Is there any info on how well it sold compared to anything?

They've produced three whole books this year, equalling their entire output for the product line (their own, not third parties published with a wizards stamp on the back next to their own logo).

Basically 5e sold players handbooks based on a permanent 50% discount on Amazon. As editions go, it's the least supported, and is filled with holes. Not shitty rules, but entire areas and concepts that are just a void, and still a void two years on.

It's pretty much the definition of failure.

[OgreBattle]

Volo's guide has nice illustrations

http://dnd.wizards.com/products/tableto ... o-monsters