D&D General Why grognards still matter

Micah Sweet said:

I don't buy from WotC. Haven't in a while for the most part. I far prefer smaller creators. But the game I play is still largely based on WotC's game, so there are plenty of relevant to me topics being discussed in the WotC 5e forums. I am lately trying to avoid 5.5 threads at least.

Click to expand...

In some respects you're in a particularly bad spot because (and feel free to correct me) you want something pretty D&D adjacent, but in some respects that's harder to get players for than either the current edition of D&D, or games radically different from it. This tends to push you toward the current edition proper, which means you need to deal with the issues connected to its publishing to some degree or another, like it or not.

Thomas Shey said:

In some respects you're in a particularly bad spot because (and feel free to correct me) you want something pretty D&D adjacent, but in some respects that's harder to get players for than either the current edition of D&D, or games radically different from it. This tends to push you toward the current edition proper, which means you need to deal with the issues connected to its publishing to some degree or another, like it or not.

Click to expand...

That is all uncomfortably true, yes. Fortunately I've gotten pretty good at shilling Level Up to my players as they filter into my group. I still use WotC 5e Classic for the game I run with my kids as players, because A5e is more complicated and they're new to tabletop, but even there I use Level Up DM-side.

Ath'kethin said:

None of them is a witch. Relax.

Click to expand...

Snerk. Nah, it's the center of mass I have questions about.

Emerikol said:

I know you can't make Waterdeep a Greyhawk city

Click to expand...

Why not?

I used maps of Waterdeep for Dyvers in one long-running Greyhawk game.

Micah Sweet said:

What a sad thing to be all one cares about if your business is making things people use for fun.

Click to expand...

What else would you expect a list commercial publishing company to care about? They are not a charity, nor an artisan producer.

Micah Sweet said:

Fair enough, and you definitely shouldn't be a jerk, but I do feel the equation changes a bit (a bit) when the restaurant you don't like is by far the most popular, and all most people ever talk about, and every other restaurant is compared to it as it sets some kind of objective standard. That's a little annoying if you still like to eat at restaurants, especially if what you do like is close enough to the popular place that conversation has a fair amount of overlap.

Click to expand...

I don't really understand your apparent obsession with WotC and what it publishes.

There are lot of other RPGs, and other RPG publishers, out there.

Micah Sweet said:

That doesn't make it right. 8f anything that's a strong argument against big business.

Click to expand...

So then instead of worrying so much about WotC, why not engage with some other RPGs?

kayakingpoodle said:

Exactly, which means maximizing purchases from the brodest customer base possible, not focusing on a single portion of that group at the expense of other parts based on title sales. Otherwise why print more than the PHB?

Click to expand...

D&D is not playable - at least, not straightforwardly - with only a PHB. So for the PHB to have value, the DMG and MM also have to be published. Also, probably, some scenarios/modules/adventure paths.

In principle there is an optimisation level for all this - that is, a degree of support products that maximise sales of the core product (PHB) without costing more than the marginal gains from those extra core sales. Presumably WotC has finance staff, and market research staff, who can calculate or at least estimate what that optimisation level is.

I assume that WotC's publication strategy reflects that calculation/estimate.