I'm just curious if there is any official word or way to guage the success level of 5th edition?
I was working on an article for my blog with the presumptious assumption that 5e has been largely embraced by the role-playing community and when I started looking at things like customer reviews on Amazon for example its largely confirmed as its clear that compared to any other edition of the game its heads above. But I am curious if there have been any official numbers or sources that give any clear indication about the games success level at this point? Anything to hang my hat on sort of speak.
Bawylie seal of approval.
oh, and Zardnaar has played so much he's both burned out and demanding more products.
It depends on your definition of success. While I'm not thrilled with 5e, I would say it achieved Hasbro's goals, but those goals are probably not what most people expect of a successful and universally recognized RPG. Essentially they're happy with the sales of the core books so they're cutting D&D's staff and budget this year and hoping they don't need to pay to make anymore material. Other companies are being licensed to produce supplements at their own risk, and the remaining team is being employed to maintain the basic rules and review the work that the licensed companies make of D&D (related to the table-top RPG, not the brand in general).
There's the Roll20 blog which has calculated that D&D 5e is the #2 most popular game played online using their VTT.
bawylie wrote:
Reinhart wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Yes, just as every other edition of D&D has been a success. Because D&D is awesome.
RedSiegfried wrote:
RedSiegfried wrote:
Reinhart wrote:
The last ICV2 quarterly report listed D&D 5th as having the #2 sales position (just under Pathfinder). Seeing as that report was for sales of nothing more than the Starter Set and 2 weeks of the PHB, that is huge. That suggests that it is very likely that 5th will take a #1 position next time around. roll20 has indicated that the popularity of 5th is growing over its medium, and it is currently the 2nd most popular game being run over roll20. That data is empirical.
Yes, it's been such a smashing success they are laying off staff. 
If you're just writing an uncritical, triumphalist blog, then I would write that it is a smashing success.
If you're trying to actually be a journalist (I hope), you'll note that they are actually laying off staff, planning on releasing far fewer products than the previous edition, and have been unable to provide the digital tools the last two editions provided. The sales of the core books seem good... other than that, the game is a shell of its former self.
Hurin88 wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Hurin88 wrote:
I believe it has been successful thus far at what it set out to do.
There was a Polygon article that appeared in my newsfeed this morning that was more interested in its future success: Why one of the biggest video game devs thinks that the tabletop game has lost its way.
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
You'd have to define what "success" is. If it's a complete recoup of production and distribution costs... probably not, because that would require every store to consistently be sold out of all D&D product. I haven't heard about WotC having to do any unplanned printings to restock the core rulebooks.
If you mean "do players like it?", the general public consensus seems to be that they do, though there are always going to be players who prefer an earlier edition, and their reasons are valid.
For me, I like how easy it is to get into. It doesn't feel as robust to me as 3.5/Pathfinder, but I think that's fine: that version of the game isn't particularly friendly to new players, and requires an uncommonly high degree of system mastery from existing players to really make the whole system sing. There's something to be said for 5E's design, which at its core seems to be the first system that enables "Rule Zero" instead of just saying Rule Zero is out there.
If you aren't familiar with the term, Rule Zero is the statement that the Dungeon Master can change any rule at any time for any reason.
3.5/Pathfinder is a system that tries to have a rule for everything. 4th Edition had a similar approach, but not a similar implementation, and suffered from its own design flaws (trying too hard to cash in on the MMORPG market and pull people away from World of Warcraft to be playing Dungeons & Dragons instead). 5th Edition just flat out systematizes Rule Zero: you don't need a rule for everything, because you invariably create scenarios where a player can't do something "cool" because there's no rule for it, and no real guidelines for doing it. With 5E, by reducing everything to ability score checks and using advantage/disadvantage, by removing disincentive to do things like used ranged weapons or cast spells in the thick of a fight, and by removing odd patches like "five-foot step", you open up a lot more opportunity for someone to do a Legolas-style "Poke 'em with an arrow then shoot the arrow at another target" move without requiring a massive feat tree. "Make a Dex check, make your attack roll, use your Bonus Action", and it's done.
By that criteria, I'd consider 5th Edition to be a runaway success. It hearkens back to an age of D&D where you didn't have a rule for everything, and the DM could just make a quick ruling and let people have fun.
Hurin88 wrote:
bawylie wrote:
eleran wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Anecdotal as well, but the gaming store (which stocks pretty well) I frequent was not able to keep PHBs on the shelves, three of my players had to wait a week (one ordered online). Spell cards are also in demand, all sold out for everything but Bard. There's an active "kids day" D&D expeditions day and one teacher-gamer runs a session as a "reward" for kids who have achieved some goal in class. Took no time to find another gamer for my table (albeit after some unsuccessful auditions), and definitely a buzz in my area. Universal disappointment from adult gamers over the Tiamat series, but the kids love it, so something is working right.
I suppose objectively, the only real measure we could have of Dungeons & Dragons' success would be if Hasbro either folded WotC entirely (absorbing Magic: The Gathering to produce under its own banner) or just told WotC that no further support would be offered for D&D production, at which point WotC would likely tell the fanbase that the existing releases are all we're getting.
I still hold out hope for an eventual "official" resurrection of Planescape, but I don't think it'll happen. I personally believe it's too "high concept" for most players, or perhaps I just have strange tastes (the latter is more likely).
As Bawylie noted, people are having fun with it. I haven't yet met anyone who's tried it who didn't like it, though I see enough naysayers on the forums. Curiously, most of the naysaying is in the form of "It isn't 4th Edition." That's kind of a "whatever" for me: I didn't like 4th Edition, and only played because it was D&D, I wanted to play D&D, and that was what was available. I don't regret its passing, or the loss of sessions where a single battle could take 2-3 hours.
I like 5E. If nothing else were produced for it, the three core rulebooks and imagination are sufficient to enjoy it for a few years before a glut of online-based house rules filter around and morph it to the point that a new edition might as well be produced.
I'd personally like to see WotC take the Paizo approach: there's no need for a new edition when the existing one is not only sufficient, but enjoyable. I didn't feel 4th Edition was that way, but I feel, at least in preliminary fashion, that 5th Edition is.
Xguild wrote:
In MY opinion (whether that's the intent of this thread or not) this game is an amazing success. Going from playing ALL the time, to getting tired of the supplements, to being turned off by the computer-game style of 4E, to suddenly wanting to play and make chararacters again... this game is great. It's quick, it's smooth, it's intuitive for new players (although I still struggle with lingering preconceptions) and I haven't really heard anything bad aside from a few nitpickings here and there.
On a bigger scale, I can't really talk to commercial success, aside from noting that the game seems front-and-center in places I haven't seen it in years, whether it's Barnes & Noble or the local comic shop.
Laying off people may mean something big and ominous -- or it COULD mean that the core group of designers have a success and either felt those who were released were either inconsequential and/or they have their eye on somebody else. Obviously, that's all conjecture, but at MY company, whenever a big chunk of business came on board, there would be a few people let go who either couldn't keep up with the new processes, or in favor of a similarly-experienced worker with a greater skillset.
As far as new releases? GAWD, we don't need several PHBs, a few Monster Manuals, etc, etc, etc... I would LOVE a yearly addendum to the rules, encompassing a few new class or race options that have been presented in modules, and I would also appreciate an online presence where some of the material that is presented in modules can be picked through and downloaded. Maybe there each module introduces a subset class, players can download a pdf that is a few pages long for 1$. I would buy something like that! And at the end of the year, the favorites could be collected in one place, or the PHB and DMG can be updated and released again every year with errata and necessary upgrades.
I digress. I think 5E is on a great path. Letting a few people go and not releasing 4-5 books a year is a nice shift. If the remaining staff can work on tweaking the core and producing adventures, I think the game will be better off. Keeping a larger crew that must continually churn out books that I can't keep up with is a nice way to kill a good thing.
Eldren73 wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
mellored wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
As for the layoffs...I think it is a function of their business model.
The idea (I am surmising) is for in house design and production of the core books, and then *some* inhouse development of supplemental material, but most of the future adventures, spell cards, etc will be farmed out to contractors.
For the first part, they need a lot of people... for the second phase, not so much... So once the first phase is over, they lay some folks off and just need to oversee the contractors.
Now, this may have always been their plan, or it may have developed during the roll-out....
iserith wrote:
Eldren73 wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
I'm playing 5E, therefore it is successful for me and will remain so for as long as I play it. Doesn't much matter to me whomever else finds it successful. (But then I require nothing more than the core rule books.) If everyone else stopped playing 5E right now and it was just my group, it wouldn't bother me; we'd still play.
How do you judge success? Just a quick google shows that the books have sold incredibly well on Amazon, and are still taking 8 out of the 15 best selling products under science fiction and fantasy gaming. There have been numerous articles (like this one http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/style/2014/12/26/1Says1bHlR7GBsCy9QAwbJ/story.html) that reference it's success.
My personal experience is that there's a lot of interest. A lot of people want to try it out in large part because they can jump in and build effective characters using just the free PDF.
My real measure? I've been having a blast playing and judging. I was pretty burned out on 4E and it's been a breath of fresh air.
Anything beyond that (including a couple of people no longer working for WOTC) is just speculation.
Cyber-Dave wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what qualfies a role-playing game as a success in terms of "fact" or "opinion", I was just looking for information. My opinion blogs are generally not particularily journalistic, though I do like to throw in a fact here and there for shits and giggles.
I'm not entirely sure what qualifies as a success in the role-playing business either but for the article I was curious to know if my opinion of the game, somehow matches the community and the sales (aka, do I love it and everyone else hates it, or am I in a sea of people that love it?). That was really all I was kind of trying to add to the article. For me personally, I'm generally a "core book" fan, in the sense that regardless of editions, I rarely bought anything more than the 3 core books, setting books and adventures. 5e is complete with the 3 core books as far as Im concerned, so if nothing is ever released again for the system it would still officially be the best D&D ever made in my humble opinion.
And no, I have nothing positive to say about 4e and bash it regularily on my blog. Am I supposed to apologize for that? Cause it would be a fake apology.
Xguild wrote:
I really like 5E. WoTC has somehow wiggled 4 of its products into my home in the last 4 months or so. Plus I have been running B series modules that I have downloaded from classics. I am spending money on the hobby again. From my POV. these are the facts.
But,
The core rules are so nice and compact, and available for free, that I don't really see getting a lot of splat mats. Downloading player info and the living rules on occasion makes me wonder if I will need to buy anything else.
If and when the OGL comes out, I will probably own more 3PP stuff. I don't expect WoTC to release high magic, strange, non-Eurocentric material. But if they did, I would throw them some cabbage. I don't hate that they are releasing quality over quantity. But when the unveiling takes place, if it is not for me, then I am out and I will wait for the next year to see what their conjurers have for us. WoTC has a good position, because they can survey half the world and design something that a quarter of the world will buy.
They have used some vague figures like "Doing better than expected" so we do not really know how well 5E is doing. I would say it has had a good lauch but it still seems 2nd plce to Pathfinder in terms of people actually playing it .
More "negative" threads are also starting to appear on ENworld so it seems the honeymoon is coming to an end. The negative threads are not really directed at the game itself but more at things a lack of product or problems getting bums on seats in organized play.
I would say it has out sold Pathfinder in recent months but a large % of those sales would be from collectors and relapsed players who maybe tried it out. In organized play and roll d20 it is in second place it seems. That could be a problem further down the track as Pathfinder itself is already a fragment of what used to be a larger player base. It seems to have done better than expected. D&D is just no longer the behemoth that had a 70%+ market share year in year out unless you add maybe all the editions togather.
If Roll d20 was a political poll it would be considered big enough to be in the margin oferror for an election. It is probably not a bad guide to the actual D&D % of the fanbase with maybe a couple of % more for the OSR players who often do not game online.
I would say it has been a good launch but one can claim that about any WoTC D&D. I don't think it has had the impact 3.0 had.
bawylie wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
I think the core books sold well, but I think most DM's who don't want to be DIY DM's will go back to pathfinder, then maybe come back every now and again when WoTC release a new AP (provided they're decent). I'm already seeing a bit of this.
From everything I have read it really feels like D&D 5e is more about the brand than the tabletop game. Feels like they gambled big with 4e and lost, so now it's all about cost reduction and growing the brand, not the table top game.
I think we will see more products (ie risk) being farmed out to 3PP over the coming years, and not a lot from WOTC.
DaveDash wrote:
Amazon sales figures.
Aug: 5,402
Sep: 5,105
Oct: 4,986
Nov: 3,066
Dec: 3,502
Jan: 4,784
Feb: 1,430
http://www.novelrank.com/asin/0786965606
If accurate less than 3.0 and prob 2E unless brick and mortar stores are selling bucket loads. They would need to be selling about X4 or X5 as many books as Amazon to equal 2E 1st year and 3.0 apparently outsold 2E in its 1st month.
Decent figures still though seems as if they would be on track to sell 50-100k units year one.
cf Biggest selling D&Ds ever (core books)
1. BECMI Red Box set)
2. 1E (3.0 may be here not 100% sure, 1E would win with adventures though)
3. 3.0
4. 2E
5. 3.5
6. 4E
7. OD&D
If you count 3.0 and 3.5 togather I think they outsell 1E in terms of PHB bit several 1E adventures broke 100k or 200k in units sold. 2E is a bit harder to pin down as it sold a lot of books and reveniue was high but they were losing money and not 100% sure how many core books were sold. ) D&D sold around 40k units total IIRC. 1E print runs were not that high (40k being the biggest AFAIK) but they had around 17 print runs.
With un official estimates on ENworld in regards to 4E print run it may outsell 4Es print run in 1 year vs 4E 2008-2010 total.
FFSAA wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
iserith wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
I like the OP's sig: "Edition wars like all debates exist because people like debates"
It's poetic, given the trajectory of this thread.
I prepped D2 the other day for 5th edition. Conversion took about 15 minutes:
* write up XP values for encounter difficulties (simple arithmetic)
* work out what fights per # of troglodytes would fall into what category (took 5-10 minutes)
* Eyeball the rest at the table with the monster manual in front of me (negligible amount of time)
The longest part was reading the actual adventure.
Coredump00 wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
Well, whether people here believe WotC or not, the first part of the first sentence from the survey article from Jan 27th tells us how they think it is going:
"The launch of fifth edition D&D has been a resounding success..."
On a side note, someone asked about them making unexpected or extra printings, the only way to answer this is for people to go check their local gaming stores and see what printing the PHBs are listed as. I bought all three of the core books at one time through Amazon, right after the DMG released, and my PHB still said First Printing, Aug 2014 in it. I do not have anywhere locally to check, but can other people hit up their local shops and see if any of the PHBs are anything other than First Printing still? If there are any Second Printings out now, the date of the printing could give some anecdotal evidence on the success so far.
bawylie wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
bawylie wrote:
bawylie wrote:
What is hard to determine and only time will tell is whether intitial sales is creating new long term players, or capturing previous players for a significant time. I believe the spike in intial sales is based on nostalgia, curiousity (what is D&D), or as a participant in the play test process. Once that flame subsides, demand will determine if more third parties start developing materials or WOTC hires more staff. It is too soon to tell.
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Uchawi wrote:
Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:
JohnLynch wrote:
As stewards of the game and by claiming to be enthusiasts who want to expand our hobby, it behooves us to go out from here as ambassadors for the game and our relatively small community. Sure, we may debate and complain here on the company boards, but when any of us goes out to other mediums or the world and actively bashes a version of the game it hurts the overall community and hurts our hobby. We need to focus on the positives just like any other sales/persuasion job. The negatives are already out there swirling.
To do it is such a poorly-worded fashion with such a lack of integrity also reflects poorly on the people who play the game and stregthens negative stereotypes.
The biggest detriment to gaming is too often gamers.
I have removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_company_about_codeofconduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the Report Comment button below the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Gunthar wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
I don't know how accurate Zard's numbers are but if those numbers are true, that's a huge success for the RPG industry. 30,000 copies is more than what most D&D competitors do during their whole lifespan. And that's just on Amazon. It really looks like 5e is going to be a multi-million dollar business again. I think people should make a distinction between commercial success and the greedy desires of corporate thieves.
I don't really understand what's the point of comparing 5e sales numbers to those of other editions though. Was anyone really expecting the sales numbers to be as good as the previous editions in a world were Pathfinder is the n°1 RPG?
So is there some consensus that it's an "unofficial" success?
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
bawylie wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
Xguild wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Xguild wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Been playing D&D in all its editions since 1989. I played 5E and enjoyed it so much that I have started my own campaign after several years of not playing regularly. I have bought all the products and 2x PHB. I will continue to buy new products and support WOTC/Hasbro. Long live D&D!
Xguild wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
Xguild wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Xguild wrote:
To OP:
Other than raw sales figures (which lack proper context to 'hang your hat on' one way or the other), and without being privy to WOTC project scope and goals for 5E, the answer to your question is "No, there is no verifiable evidence to clearly indicate if 5E is a sucess or not".
It is the sort of question that, at the moment, eludes the scientific method and can only be answered largely by perception and estimation. Witness this thread, which, as with most of the Internet, has more than enough subjective opinion presented as ojective fact for you to draw any conclusion you'd like. I don't think you would be 'wrong' by any true definition of the word with describing 5E as "a success" or "not a success". Probably best to describe how you feel or think about the answer to your original question (and personally, that sort of thing is more compelling than quoting sales figures).
Gnarl wrote:
tgmoore wrote:
I'm not here to argue to success of this edition (way too early for that as 4e was a success at this point sales wise), but I do see some people comically using 2 after Christmas layoffs as evidence of 5e failing.
First, just about every traded company has layoffs around this time because it helps the bottom line look nicer for investors. Eventually new, cheaper people get hired to take their place in most cases.
Second, layoffs right after Christmas is pretty much an annual thing at WOTC (for the reason I stated above). These were happening every year from 3.5e (when I started coming around to notice; may have happened for 3e also) to the end of 4e. Didn't matter how good things were going. Turnover was going to happen.
Third, this was actually the smallest number of layoffs I've seen and only one of them was dealing with D&D and was only an editor and not a designer or developer. Those teams are still intact. You can get new editors from anywhere.
And it also amuses me that people are using the "cancellation" of one never set in stone book as proof things are going bad. This happened several times with 3.5e and 4e and wasn't related to the "health" of the game. It's because they realized these projects weren't going to stand on their on and either folded the stuff in other books or scrapped it.
And obviously when you think about what they player's book was going to be it would have been 30ish pages max with a lot of fluff. That should have just went into the "campaign" book.
bonethug0108 wrote:
bonethug0108 wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
At the store where I have begun DMing a 5e game there still seems to be more 3.5 games starting up. There's also a very popular pathfinder game that's the longest running there, with a waiting list of players.
I recently played in a 3.5 game as I've been keen to play anything since coming back to the hobby through 5e, in the end I found it hard like playing an older version of a video game, it just has different controls and bad graphics. At least while I'm still trying to get a newish system under my belt.
I mention this just as a small example, but in both the 5e game I ran and the 3.5 game I played in, I met 9 other players out of which I think most had played or do play pathfinder. Maybe a couple of guys hadn't.
When playing 3.5 I mentioned I was DMing 5e and one of the guys there didn't even know there was a new edition?
other stores seem to mostly play 4e or pathfinder, (Sydney CBD) although I get the feel maybe people like to feel very comfortable with a system before playing in store, with strangers which is why there aren't as many games of it? Again, speculation based on small figures.
My general feeling is that 5e has done well, in that most people I talk to really like it, I think in that sense it's a success, they made a quality product that people are generally happy with. It does seem to be taking longer to catch on then from what I remember of 3e in terms of people playing. And I think that's part of the plan as reflected by the slow release schedule. Initially it seems more about pulling back players that left altogether and picking up new ones. Rusted on pathfinder fans will take a longer game to convert. So time will tell on that one.
You know how, when you are playing at a FLGS or convention, you look over and see those card gamers or miniature gamers? And they have zero interest in playing your silly TTRGP? That's because they are scratching their particular itch with their game of choice.
The same can be said within the RGP community. Different games scratch different itches. I think we can all agree that Pathfinder (even more so than 3.5) scratches a different itch than 5e in some regards. And that particular system attracts a certain kind of player to it more than 5e can.
And there is nothing wrong with that.
Neonflux wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Xguild wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
Gunthar wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Reius wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Success is relative and can be open to many interpretations.
The marketing for 5e in my opinion has less bite than the 3e and 4e debuts, but I think that the brand is probably doing well enough to keep the product from being shelved in the foreseeable future. The staff and support for the brand has certainly been reduced, but the game lives on.
Synergy from 3rd party support and organized living campaigns may very well be the crux of 5e's popularity (or lack thereof) in the next few years. Both are still in their early stages for this edition so it will be interesting to see what comes out of it. An open call was recently made for new writers for Adventurers League; I may even throw my cards in this time around.
If the next Dungeons and Dragons movie can finally get under way, then 5e will probably have a significantly longer shelf life than its immediate predecessor.
Writing the rules to cater to established consumers while banking on tools of popular culture to draw in new players would be a smart move to make in my opinion. A safer one anyway.
Then again, my background is currently in theatre and politics, not business/marketing, so what would I know?
We started playing in November at Las Cruces, New Mexico. We consistantly have more players than we have room, every session. We play Hoard of the Dragon Queen with so many players we are talking about splitting up the session so that way two groups are playing at the same time. Even then those groups would easily be 7 players and a DM. So many of the players are stepping up to be a DM and they are making clubs at the high school and college to get more people into playing D&D. There are more D&D players now because of 5th edition than there ever was in the 90's for 3rd and 3.5. The only set back I see to D&D's moment is how poorly constructed their books are. I've had my book since November and the pages from the Paladin to the Equipment section have completely fallen out of my book in a nice little packet.
At this point it's up to Wizards to take 5th edition seriously and put the work in to find a better publisher for the books. Besides that, community outreach on behalf of Wizards needs to ramped up. The store owner for Zia doesn't see DnD as being as strong as MtG and I think Wizards is the only group that can fix that perception. Currently the DnD community is a lot more involved, active and positive than the MtG community.
One thing that would help is better support for the Adventurer's League Encounters. We don't know what to do with DM experience points and rest days. And other little things like that which could be easily answered but they aren't and the packets are vague so that means a lot of guess work and wasted time.
Dungeons and Dragons is huge here in Las Cruces, New Mexico but we aren't getting any support from the Wizards.
OoftaMeg wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Xguild wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
I only know my experience. It has energized a group of AD&D players...I am teaching my kids...and we are buying everything released. Long live d&d!
warpiglet wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Success depends largely on what the goals of the product line were. WotC thinks that the 5e roll out was a success, and the system as a whole is successful. That tells me WotC thinks 5e met the goals they were attempting to achieve with 5e. Therefore, 5e is a success.
Whether it continues to be a success depends on future development and market goals. Until then, success is largely subjective.
For me, I think 5e did a great job of blending the previous editions. They looked at each edition as a whole, kept the aspects that both enhanced gameplay and were inclusive, streamlined the rules to be both intuitive and robust, added a few things to both reduce bookkeeping and encourage creativity, and intentionally left some rules out to enable flexibility among various playgroups/playstyles. It is flexible/adaptable like 1e/2e, is robust/inclusive like 3e and is cohesive/intuitive like 4e. Those were the goals of 5e and they were met. In my humbly uneducated opinion, 5e as a ruleset is a success.
I don't know enough about marketing to have a viable opinion on the matter, but I rather like the slow release schedule of the new edition. They are quality checking everything before an announcement is even made for a release; and when they do announce a future release, they provide it in the form of either a public playtest (such as the new Eberron stuff) or a community poll. I, for one, am not stressed about trying to keep up with the material. And the material is sufficient enough to hold me long enough to create some of my own material for personal use (new backgrounds, new magic items, new factions, home campaigns etc.) Plus, my guess is by having a slower release schedule they will have lasting success due both to the steady influx of new and former customers and to the material released several years from now. For all I know, that is their marketing goal with this strategy; kind of like The Tortoise and The Hare. (Personally, I would like to see them work on Birthright rather that Eberron first, but I'm patient; I can wait. 
)
It's a success to the people who like it and a failure to those who don't. This is, as it was always going to be. I don't know or care what an official success would be. This is the version of D&D I prefer to play and will continue to play in the future (although I could be convinced to play Heroic 4th ed or up to mid level Pathfinder or 2nd edition).
JohnLynch wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Mistwell wrote:
JohnLynch wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
JohnLynch wrote:
That people chooses to take personal slight when someone critizises their favourite football team, their favourite religion or favourite edition of D&D is a problem with those people, not with the person critizising. "Taking offense" is a choice you make, and that choice is entirely up to you.
Xguild wrote:
kalil wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Xguild wrote:
JohnLynch wrote:
Yes it is on all fronts. I actually got to play the other day, I have been DMing since the playtest. Great game.
There's only one simple crieria you need to determine if it's a success or not. Are you and your players having fun playing 5th Edition?
If the answer is yes, congrats and keep on keepin' on!
If it's a no, then find something you will enjoy until your answer is yes!
Synjin wrote:
kalil wrote:
Reinhart wrote:
Xguild, people as angrily defensive and hatebashing to things other people like are why I'm hesitant to try to get other people into TTRPGs, because I know if they start going further into it, people like you are just going to trash them for liking things you don't like.
Not to mention it looks poorly on 5e if, when asked why it's good, your first response is to start attacking 4e, and the only thing that style of argument makes me think is "Geez, is 5e really so bad that he can't tell me if it's good without pulling the 'At least he's not Hitler' defense?"
EnglishLanguage wrote:
Xguild wrote:
EnglishLanguage wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
From my reading (and my limited experience in marketing) I think Hasbro's goal is to leverage the D&D Brand.
Here are some of the signs:
1) focus on quality rather than quantity
2) maintain a small staff to lower costs
3) seek/use other media to produce product and publicize the brand (I.e video games, board games, movie when legal is resolved, license the brand for accessories, etc.).
Interestingly, although the ttrpg market is more competitive and maybe less vibrant than the golden years, fantasy and even the D&D name is more popular in mainstream America (maybe the world). This also plays to a marketing strategy that leverages a brand name.
Although 5e seems to be popular amongst gamers, since the branding is most likely the goal, it will take years to determine if it is ultimately a success.
Gatt wrote:
Gatt wrote:
Xguild wrote:
Rhenny wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
how many phb's they sell probably has the most to say about weather or not
this edition will last and if we will see lots of modules and other stuff released for it.
and by all accounts they do seem to be selling plenty of PHB's.
last i herd they were in their 3rd print run and that whas a while ago.
also all 3 core books are in the top 100 in the RPG section of BGG.
and the game is #1 on this list: http://www.enworld.org/forum/hotgames.php
notice it is beating pathfinder by a wide margin on that list.
anyway every indication i have seen that might say anything at all about this
has been very positive.
sure there are complainers everywhere, a disproportional ammount on this forum for some reason,
but wherever groups are voting on the matter the majority seems very positive.
lastly i think the fact that WotC apparently has several years of releases already planned
seems like a pretty positive sign.
i would say 5e is doing well.
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
Samrin wrote:
Reius wrote:
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
bonethug0108 wrote:
Dougan_Axehammer wrote:
It got me back to playing DnD when I thought I was done with the game (not cause of hate, just cause of edition fatigue and not being interested in starting a new collection of books) so in my opinion it's very successful
I also like hearing they'll have a slower release schedule as I'm really not into getting more than a book or two a year (especially not ones with a bunch of new rules that make it take forever to pick options because you have to search through a bunch of books to find the one that fits like happens in other editions) so another success!
lastknightleft wrote: