Stan!, a longtime employee and contractor for TSR and Wizards of the Coast has aa YouTube interview show.
He had a recent interview with Ray Winninger, who led the D&D team from 2020 to 2022. I found many parts of the interview noteworthy. I'll link the video, and then provide my summary for discussion. The main D&D part begins around the 39 minute mark.
Interview Link:
My summary:
1) When he took over D&D he was told his teams goal was to double the size of D&D by 5 years. They doubled it in 3 years instead though he doesn't personally take all the credit for that as it was many factors at play.
2) They were selling about as many PHB every year as were sold for MOST of the 3e era. And they were already 7 years in, selling more PHBs every year than most of 3e's entire run.
3) The story up until 5e was each new edition would have a fantastic first 2 years and would taper off at 5 to 8 years off and a new edition would be needed. That never happened with 5e and core book sales increased every year since 5e began.
4) The average campaign lasts about 6-8 months instead of years now, and so from a business perspective people buy more stuff as they cycle through campaigns. This was a change which the company first really noticed in the shift from 2e to 3e. It was a phenomenon first found out in 1997 and 1998 from TSR research, where the average campaign was 9-11 months already. But it took until the design of 5e to actually design an edition with that 6-8 month time frame in mind as much of what they did with 3e and 4e still apparently had longer campaigns in mind despite their own prior research indicating it was likely shorter. This is why 5e launch with "Here's your 6-9 month campaign in a single book" format. He thinks this was one of three main factors which accelerated D&D's growth. [See around 48-50 min mark]
5) The audience changed from 88% male to 50% male for 5e, but this was not a reduction in the number of males playing but instead a huge additional growth in the number of females playing along with a growth in the number of males playing. This doubled the size of the audience, in addition to high school boys and now high school girls, which was a big growth accelerator.
6) The ascendance of YouTube in teaching people how to play D&D was a big, probably biggest, growth factor for 5e because it made the game much more approachable. Before that point, it was either find an existing group or go buy these 3 textbook-sized books and teach yourself. Now, you're a high schooler who has heard of D&D and just watches a video to see what it's about and how it works. It also resulted in cross-pollination to other niche nerd interests people had who were perusing YouTube.
7) D&D was at a low point when 5e launched. 4e didn't find the audience it had hoped to. WOTC had dramatically scaled down the department for D&D after 4e and WOTC was considering tabling D&D at that time. Due to this, they published far fewer products on 5e launch. They still would have liked to do a publication every month they just didn't have the resources for it.
[NOTE: Mike Mearls responded to this point and disagreed as follows:
"That's 100% incorrect. Market research showed that the typical D&D fan wasn't interested in buy multiple products a year. This also played into the marketing strategy of building each product up as a big event. You can't do a Stream of Annihilation every month. The product release cadence was a specific strategy."]
[Note 2: Mearls further states, "Yeah, the "they" is me, Nathan Stewart, and Liz Schuh. We had asked about product frequency as part of the playtest surveys. If we had really wanted monthly releases, we would've just brought on more publishers under contract to do stuff. We had signed on Green Ronin, Kobold Press, and Sasquatch to fill out the release schedule while we finished the core rulebooks. He's probably conflating the two."]
8 ) They discovered, accidentally, that by scaling down the number of products they published, the remaining books they did publish sold a lot more. In fact they were not losing in total sales by producing 3-4 books per year versus producing far more books per year. The prior TSR policy of selling 60 books per year was cannibalizing book sales from each other, and to some extent that had been still happening with 3e and even 4e. Even though they knew signs of this problem had been seen in 1998's surveys.
9) When he returned to D&D 5e, he was still under the impression it was operating as a "front-list driven" business, where they newest products you put out were almost all you sold. That had been the main theory under TSR and 3e, that the life cycle of products was 60-90 days. But 5e had rapidly become a "back-list driven" business. 65% to 70% of D&D sales are the products which had not just come out. New products accounted for just roughly 33% of the sales. Which led to no 5e WOTC products ever going out of print. Out of the Abyss, which is 10 years old at this point, is sill selling for WOTC. Which is an astounding change from prior editions. This change to a back-list business brought certainty, predictability, and health to the D&D business line. This change was so major it's the #1 thing which boosted D&D into this other realm of success.
10) Digital was the last major change and upswing for D&D. Sales of digital books on D&D Beyond are very high margin.
11) This combination of factors pushed D&D "well into the 9 figures".
12) OGL: The huge success of 5e attracted Hasbro executive attention. WOTC was, politely, disagreeing with them. The OGL was one of those points of contention. He was very pleased Hasbro reversed course so quickly after the OGL mistake. The council WOTC gives Hasbro is to recognize both D&D and MtG are unique business types and not normal product lines. There remains still a battle for the soul of D&D between WOTC and Hasbro but he's now optimistic that Hasbro is starting to understand the issues better.
13) Running the D&D team has become more complicated because they're no longer selling to a monolithic set of core audiences who want things like old school heavy Forgotten Realms lore (and it has become much harder to serve the older school core audience as D&D has grown.) For example, the largest growing segment of D&D sales is 11 to 13 year olds now, who come in with no background in D&D. The Team now has to think about so many different audiences and expectations when developing products than they used to have to consider.
14) The people in the D&D team are genuine fans of smaller publishers. He loves for example Pendragon. Everyone on the Team has interest in growing the whole industry and favorite smaller publishers.
15) Advice to smaller publishers is a) keep in mind the multitude of differing audiences now, and b) keep in mind the era is now digital focused if you want a larger audience. That includes remote play, like Roll20, and character creation.
16) D&D is now a major, important, strategic pillar for Hasbro and can no longer be that little thing over in the corner. It is now one of Hasbro's top 5 brands.
17) He calls out ENWorld, Advanced version of 5e impresses him. It's for too small a segment of the audience that WOTC couldn't sell that, but he likes it and hopes it's doing well. Also calls out all the heavier lore stuff selling on DM's Guild which he likes, and Keith Baker's pushing additional Eberron lore on DM's Guild, etc..
18) One of the big TSR mistakes was so many products they put out were dependent on other products. Example: put out Spelljammer, then a War expansion on Spelljammer, which is only for a segment of the larger audience. Then you put out adventures for that expansion, which reduces your audience again. Half their products under TSR became two or three levels deep in dependency in prior books. That didn't serve new fans well. The original Greyhawk map and vague description outline served new audiences better than the product dependency model that TSR eventually pursued. Products need to be self-contained things to be friendly for new players. This, despite designers liking to do more and more deep lore.
19) He is confident D&D will see another 50 years.
I'm going to press x to doubt that half the 5e playerbase is female. Has it increased over the past 20 years? Absolutely, my guess is that it's possibly doubled! From 10-15% to 20-30% at most and that upper limit includes people that transitioned during that period as well.
Quote from: RNGm on January 23, 2025, 06:25:43 PMI'm going to press x to doubt that half the 5e playerbase is female. Has it increased over the past 20 years? Absolutely, my guess is that it's possibly doubled! From 10-15% to 20-30% at most and that upper limit includes people that transitioned during that period as well.
A marketing study in 1999 found that 19% of the TTRPG player base is female. That's been the best demographic survey that's been made public because it was a controlled representative sample.
https://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/wotcdemo.html
I'm more skeptical about the recent surveys that have released less information to the public, but I'm sure they have better marketing information now, and insiders like Winninger would be aware of it.
Quote from: RNGm on January 23, 2025, 06:25:43 PMI'm going to press x to doubt that half the 5e playerbase is female. Has it increased over the past 20 years? Absolutely, my guess is that it's possibly doubled! From 10-15% to 20-30% at most and that upper limit includes people that transitioned during that period as well.
When is the last time you walked into a game store in a major city that had people playing Adventurer's League games? Lot of girls. A lot of high school students. I know my daughter plays, and her girlfriends play, and they're 13 and 14.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2025, 07:47:29 PMWhen is the last time you walked into a game store in a major city that had people playing Adventurer's League games? Lot of girls. A lot of high school students. I know my daughter plays, and her girlfriends play, and they're 13 and 14.
Adventurer's League specifically? Not since before the pandemic but that was still 5e and it was no where near 50% locally when I did. A major metro store on a weekend filled with dozens of gamers? This past Sunday... and it was 85-90% guys in total across all games (minis, rpgs, painting, etc). I'm glad though that your daughter and her girlfriends are having fun playing in it though (no sarcasm) as more gamers of all types is better for the hobby overall.
Quote from: RNGm on January 23, 2025, 06:25:43 PMI'm going to press x to doubt that half the 5e playerbase is female. Has it increased over the past 20 years? Absolutely, my guess is that it's possibly doubled! From 10-15% to 20-30% at most and that upper limit includes people that transitioned during that period as well.
agreed: every convention I have been to, including Gamehole last October had a 5e WOTC D&D room
that room was entirely populated by guys (99%+), most of them younger, almost all of them extremely overweight and sickly. I hate to use the term neckbeard, but it was an ocean of neckbeard
the only women playing 5e are the ones grifting on YouTube and pretending to be gamers.
women do like to play Call of Cthulhu and some other RPGs
TLDR, let alone watch the video. Nothing more than a pro- WoTC 5e D&D fluff piece.
WotC doesn't know what a woman is, so how would they know if half their player base are women?
Quote from: blackstone on January 24, 2025, 09:23:19 AMTLDR, let alone watch the video. Nothing more than a pro- WoTC 5e D&D fluff piece.
It's about the early days of WOTC making 5e, and admission they were in fact working on a skeleton crew and they nearly pulled the plug on D&D after 4e. I would not say this is a fluff piece, and it is not by WOTC or anyone currently working for them. It's an ex-employee.
Quote from: link=msg=1300190 date=17376617235) The audience changed from 88% male to 50% male for 5e
Absolute bunkum.
There are more female players, but it's no 50%. Visiting a gaming con, any gaming con, puts the lie to that.
These guys are in a bubble...
Quote from: link=msg=1300190 date=1737661723For example, the largest growing segment of D&D sales is 11 to 13 year olds now, who come in with no background in D&D. The Team now has to think about so many different audiences and expectations when developing products than they used to have to consider.
More Bunkum. This actually explains a lot of WotC's missteps. They actually have no idea why D&D is popular.
The 5e boom is functionally no different than the D&D boom in the 80's.
'Thinking about' and chasing those 'different audiences' has resulted in some of their worse selling products.
Quote from: link=msg=1300190 date=173766172315) Advice to smaller publishers is a) keep in mind the multitude of differing audiences now, and b) keep in mind the era is now digital focused if you want a larger audience. That includes remote play, like Roll20, and character creation.
a) Smaller publishers would do well to
utterly ignore this. Just make something cool. If the customers like it, you will do well.
b) Actually true.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2025, 02:48:43 PM5) The audience changed from 88% male to 50% male for 5e, but this was not a reduction in the number of males playing but instead a huge additional growth in the number of females playing along with a growth in the number of males playing. This doubled the size of the audience, in addition to high school boys and now high school girls, which was a big growth accelerator.
Well when anyone can play make believe with genders, sure why not say that.
Anyone living in reality knows this is a lie.
Quote from: Jaeger on January 24, 2025, 03:07:02 PMQuote from: link=msg=1300190 date=17376617235) The audience changed from 88% male to 50% male for 5e
Absolute bunkum.
There are more female players, but it's no 50%. Visiting a gaming con, any gaming con, puts the lie to that.
These guys are in a bubble...
Anecdotal experience...junior high to college, I saw a handful of female players. When Vampire showed up, you might actually see upwards of 50% females, but usually it was maybe one or two, usually the GMs girlfriend and her goth friend who tended to knit during combat. Something like that. D&D 5th rolls around, I was in one group, we had seven total players, two female.
Rolemaster, Star Wars, TMNT, Mech Warrior, Robotech, Rifts, I never saw a single female player. Not one.
The 50% female thing is total horseshit. At the last con I attended, there were more women than usual, but the ones that did play were much more casual, and I'd say at most at any table it was two, three max.
Again, anecdcotal, and unlike SOME PEOPLE I don't consider transwomen women; in which case the number would be four max.
I'm sure that in certain locations, or amongst certain groups, there are more female players than what is normally seen elsewhere.
On the other hand, there are likely many groups, where 25% female would be considered a high number.
Quote from: Man at Arms on January 24, 2025, 05:33:10 PMI'm sure that in certain locations, or amongst certain groups, there are more female players than what is normally seen elsewhere.
On the other hand, there are likely many groups, where 25% female would be considered a high number.
Yes.
For the longest time, 3 of 5 players in my Sunday game were female. That was just the way it worked out.
Today my Sunday group is 4 players, only one is female. Also, just the way it worked out.
My personal experience of tending to have a strong female presence at the gaming table is in no way indicative of female interest in the wider hobby. Paying attention to who is around you at Cons is a much better barometer for that.
Funny how we're focusing on the number of women in the hobby part of the post.
Personally, I don't care. If you like the hobby, participate. But if you don't, don't try to come in and lecture and change the hobby to fit your ideology. A lot of the "Make the hobby more welcoming to women" involves changing the hobby itself to conform to a very specific kind of person, man or woman, who has the notion that the hobby is "problematic" due to "misogyny" and "patriarchy". We've seen how that turned out. Screeching activists complaining about how orcs are black people and a chainmail bikini is the height of oppression.
I've been seeing more women at conventions, but most seem more interested in cosplay than role-playing games.
>5) The audience changed from 88% male to 50% male for 5e, but this was not a reduction in the number of males playing but instead a huge additional growth in the number of females playing along with a growth in the number of males playing. This doubled the size of the audience, in addition to high school boys and now high school girls, which was a big growth accelerator.
I'm calling that a lie. I've picked up one woman player online. When I go to hobby shops I see about 10% - 15% women, which includes staff. When I go to conventions I see a lot of women present, cosplaying, drinks and spouses/girl friends, although one time a guy bought his decerped mother in a wheel chair to play. At the tables, again maybe 15%.
I think Winninger is using some leftarded firms who lie about demographics or D&D Beyond with dudes who call themselves chicks and put on some nail polish.
Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on January 24, 2025, 09:01:49 AMQuote from: RNGm on January 23, 2025, 06:25:43 PMI'm going to press x to doubt that half the 5e playerbase is female. Has it increased over the past 20 years? Absolutely, my guess is that it's possibly doubled! From 10-15% to 20-30% at most and that upper limit includes people that transitioned during that period as well.
agreed: every convention I have been to, including Gamehole last October had a 5e WOTC D&D room
that room was entirely populated by guys (99%+), most of them younger, almost all of them extremely overweight and sickly. I hate to use the term neckbeard, but it was an ocean of neckbeard
the only women playing 5e are the ones grifting on YouTube and pretending to be gamers.
women do like to play Call of Cthulhu and some other RPGs
This is an actual sourced study on what women don't want to date hobby wise.
Most unattractive:
#1: Comic books
#3: Debating
#5: MTG
Those three have a lot in D&D, anyone here can't remember debating a modifier for an attack? Women historically look at D&D as unnatractive.
https://datepsychology.com/the-most-and-least-attractive-male-hobbies/
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 24, 2025, 08:11:30 PMI think Winninger is using some leftarded firms who lie about demographics or D&D Beyond with dudes who call themselves chicks and put on some nail polish.
Yeah, it reminds me of the study the video game industry was using years ago to justify the switch to female protagonists in so many AAA console and PC games. The study said almost half of video gamers were female but it turns out they counted people who casually played Candy Crush and similar mobile games in that poll. While technically true, that's not particularly a strong crossover audience with console shooters and action games that they were changing as a result. Again, I do agree that the percentage of female hardcore gamers has increased over the past 20 years but it's no where near half like they're pretending to justify the massive shift in target audience industry wide.
You guys realize they ask gender in every survey, and for your DnDBeyond account, right? I mean, you can critique their data all you want of course, but it's definitely superior data to your personal experience. Their sales sure show they're doing something right.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2025, 09:57:42 PMYou guys realize they ask gender in every survey, and for your DnDBeyond account, right? I mean, you can critique their data all you want of course, but it's definitely superior data to your personal experience. Their sales sure show they're doing something right.
That's a good point. I honestly don't use dndbeyond much (tried a 5e campaign for about 8 months during lockdowns but that's it) but I didn't see any option for me to declare my gender on my profile. Do you know where it's listed? No sarcasm as I'm genuinely asking since I didn't see it but I'm definitely NOT an expert nor was my search particuarly exhaustive. Given their politics, it seems like a dicey (pun intended) proposition for them unless they have all 47 in a pull down menu or let you just self declare whatever gibberish you want.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 24, 2025, 09:57:42 PMYou guys realize they ask gender in every survey,
"Gender"
Quote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2025, 02:48:43 PMThey discovered, accidentally, that by scaling down the number of products they published, the remaining books they did publish sold a lot more. In fact they were not losing in total sales by producing 3-4 books per year versus producing far more books per year. The prior TSR policy of selling 60 books per year was cannibalizing book sales from each other, and to some extent that had been still happening with 3e and even 4e. Even though they knew signs of this problem had been seen in 1998's surveys.
The fact a company's own products can be competing against each other shows just how much of a zero sum game this market actually is. And lots of designers seem to be in complete denial of this.
Quote from: Anon Adderlan on January 25, 2025, 12:03:04 AMQuote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2025, 02:48:43 PMThey discovered, accidentally, that by scaling down the number of products they published, the remaining books they did publish sold a lot more. In fact they were not losing in total sales by producing 3-4 books per year versus producing far more books per year. The prior TSR policy of selling 60 books per year was cannibalizing book sales from each other, and to some extent that had been still happening with 3e and even 4e. Even though they knew signs of this problem had been seen in 1998's surveys.
The fact a company's own products can be competing against each other shows just how much of a zero sum game this market actually is. And lots of designers seem to be in complete denial of this.
Not necessarily. It's possible to saturate a market. We saw it with X-Wing Miniatures. The game was very sucessful and very popular, so FFG started pumping out expansions. Eventually they covered all the major aspects of gameplay, and everyone had plenty of ships. They painted themselves into a corner, so to speak.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 24, 2025, 07:21:28 PMFunny how we're focusing on the number of women in the hobby part of the post.
Mainly because this assertion is clearly and demonstrably untrue.
Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 24, 2025, 08:23:56 PMhttps://datepsychology.com/the-most-and-least-attractive-male-hobbies/
I had no idea the dating community gave so much thought to Archery and Blacksmithing. Is this survey from the middle ages?
Quote from: RNGm on January 24, 2025, 09:50:18 PMYeah, it reminds me of the study the video game industry was using years ago to justify the switch to female protagonists in so many AAA console and PC games. The study said almost half of video gamers were female but it turns out they counted people who casually played Candy Crush and similar mobile games in that poll. While technically true, that's not particularly a strong crossover audience with console shooters and action games that they were changing as a result. Again, I do agree that the percentage of female hardcore gamers has increased over the past 20 years but it's no where near half like they're pretending to justify the massive shift in target audience industry wide.
To be fair though, if I'm going to have to be looking at someone's backside for hours, I'd rather it be a representation of an attractive woman's. Lara Croft is a thing for a reason.
The same logic held for oh so many third-party supplements during the d20 glut too; put a hot chick on your cover to grab eyeballs of the largely male demographic.
I'd honestly agrue that particular initiative wasn't some acknowledgement of increasing numbers of female players as that their primary demographic likes eye candy.
The woke, of course, insisted eventually that all the women be uglified and that's where you're really seeing the falloff. Turns out there pretty much ARE objective standards of female beauty (with cultural preferences within the range). Middle-aged, blue-haired landwhale with piercings, tats and a buzzcut is basically the antithesis of all those standards.
My bet would be that, like the candy crush example above, the demographic numbers were snagged from the WoD LARPing heyday and presented as if that was the norm. I also remember a lot of women attanding Origins in the 00's, but that was definitely during the LARP heyday (even D&D settings like Arcanis were hosting LARP events then).
I also think the prevalence of online gaming via Roll20 likely skews the demographic slightly more female, but only in the digital sphere, the number of women showing up at the FLGS venues for RPGs is about the same as always... there has been a notable uptick in women turning up for boardgame nights though.
Quote from: Chris24601 on January 25, 2025, 08:41:01 AMI also think the prevalence of online gaming via Roll20 likely skews the demographic slightly more female, but only in the digital sphere, the number of women showing up at the FLGS venues for RPGs is about the same as always... there has been a notable uptick in women turning up for boardgame nights though.
In private games or are you referring to streamed games that you watch? I'd agree with the latter but the representation seems curated to me personally as they almost always magically hit the proscribed number of check boxes of every type for practically every campaign. I've been mostly online RPGing since the pandemic started (with only a few months worth of exceptions in total including just this past weekend ironically) and I'd say that only about 1/4 to 1/5 of the online crowd (whether on discord, roll20, foundry, etc) I've met in dozens of games (unfortunately no successful long time campaigns though much to my dismay) is female. It's not like the online sessions have been turning others away most of the time so this is just the natural proportion of people who expressed interest in the post advertising needing players (usually in a discord for a setting/system) and who showed up. One single session out of dozens of different games (admittedly for about a half dozen systems though) had two women out of the five players... other than that it was typically just one or none. I fully admit that maybe the types of games I'm interested in might influence that (typically rules light systems, sword and sorcery or cyberpunk settings) and women are flocking relatively speaking to more popular ones like heroic high fantasy (i.e. D&D) and slice of life games.
I'd say private virtual games skew more female too. I'd say the number of women in virtual campaigns is about twice what it is in live play.
Now, that generally means about a third of the group being women virtually vs. 15-20% face-to-face so it's not like it's a majority even there, but it's definitely more.
I'd guess something about the anonymity of voice-only and screen names makes it less potentially stigmatizing and, while I haven't gone out of my way to check, most of my online gaming is during weeknights and I wonder if the female population falls off for weekend games.
Also, the numbers are for 5E, and especially if they're getting them from D&D Beyond, they probably don't reflect a lot of the older player base and non-5E/Beyond users.
Now, the scale of D&D (especially if the claims about 5E sales are accurate) means that's probably just a rounding error, but it could also be that we have two parallel but largely non-overlapping hobby cultures here.
Quote from: Chris24601 on January 25, 2025, 11:50:06 AMI'd say private virtual games skew more female too. I'd say the number of women in virtual campaigns is about twice what it is in live play.
Now, that generally means about a third of the group being women virtually vs. 15-20% face-to-face so it's not like it's a majority even there, but it's definitely more.
I'd guess something about the anonymity of voice-only and screen names makes it less potentially stigmatizing and, while I haven't gone out of my way to check, most of my online gaming is during weeknights and I wonder if the female population falls off for weekend games.
Fair enough and 1/3 would be reasonable (and I wouldn't have bothered posting in this thread if that was what WOTC was claiming). I'd have zero issue with being the only guy in an online or in person campaign as long as I was enjoying myself in the rules, setting, and the tableside experience.
Quote from: Chris24601 on January 25, 2025, 11:50:06 AMI'd say private virtual games skew more female too. I'd say the number of women in virtual campaigns is about twice what it is in live play.
Now, that generally means about a third of the group being women virtually vs. 15-20% face-to-face so it's not like it's a majority even there, but it's definitely more.
I'd guess something about the anonymity of voice-only and screen names makes it less potentially stigmatizing and, while I haven't gone out of my way to check, most of my online gaming is during weeknights and I wonder if the female population falls off for weekend games.
It's hard to say. There's a lot of varying anecdotes and data.
I don't trust public statements from any large corporation. However, corporations are also going to have some disgruntled ex-employees willing to dish out dirt on them. For a typical corporation, there are a lot of these.
The best measured number that I know of is the 19% measured in 1999. That's the only case I know where a statistically representative population was polled, and results were officially released to the public. If the public results were blatantly falsified in that case, there has been a lot of time and a lot of ex-employees who could call that out.
The releases after that are less reliable, to my mind. I suspect that WotC has collected better data, but they haven't made them public. When they release more limited information, like their release of some online play statistics a few years ago, that seems more suspect.
A few other observations:
1) Generally speaking, convention attendees aren't necessarily a good measure of the playing population. In any field, conventions are more about the hard-core audience and not about the casual audience. Similar goes for game store play - it's not necessarily the same trends as at-home play.
2) What hobbies are considered attractive to the opposite sex also isn't a good measure of participation. For example, knitting or needlepoint is likely not considered attractive to either sex. i.e. Men who do knitting aren't considered more attractive to women, and women who do knitting aren't considered more attractive to men. Nevertheless, it is a common hobby.
To add my personal experience, which I don't consider these any more or less reliable than anyone else's... My current group is 3 out of 6 women. None of the women go to game conventions or play in game stores. Also, as an observation on the younger generation, my son's stepsister plays with a predominantly female group. I don't think she has ever been to a game convention either - while my son has gone to a lot of game conventions with me when he was growing up. (He's 24, she's 20 now, I think.)
I don't know enough about the bigger picture to tell. From my understanding, this forum is close to 100% male, so that will skew anecdotal experience. I could believe the female participation is anywhere from a third to a half.
Quote from: Man at Arms on January 24, 2025, 05:33:10 PMI'm sure that in certain locations, or amongst certain groups, there are more female players than what is normally seen elsewhere.
On the other hand, there are likely many groups, where 25% female would be considered a high number.
Agreed. The school-based D&D club I run with about 50 kids is probably 35-40% female. A couple of the campaign groups are majority female. But it's still mostly boys.
Also, one thing I have noticed is that, while the number of girls has increased, they are also more likely to drop out. The boys will play all three or four years, while some of the girls are in for a few sessions or one year, then they disappear...
According to this article (https://www.geekwire.com/2023/dungeons-dragons-in-2023-wizards-of-the-coast-reveals-planescape-revival-and-more/), "According to Wizards' internal studies of the player population, 60% of D&D players are male, 39% are female, and 1% identify otherwise" That's supposedly from January 2023.
I just find it hard to believe it's selling so well compared to the early days of D&D. What stores sell it? Back in the day, you'd find it in book stores and toy stores along with hobby shops on top of game stores.
We don't even have toy stores anymore, not many book stores and hobby shops seems to double down on other stuff instead of games. At work (Walmart) we had the starter set, but got clearanced)
Is it mostly online? That's the only thing I can think.
I mean, I realize the country is double the population that is 40 years ago. And they are likely selling internationally (especially online)
Quote from: JeremyR on January 26, 2025, 02:15:15 AMI just find it hard to believe it's selling so well compared to the early days of D&D. What stores sell it? Back in the day, you'd find it in book stores and toy stores along with hobby shops on top of game stores.
We don't even have toy stores anymore, not many book stores and hobby shops seems to double down on other stuff instead of games. At work (Walmart) we had the starter set, but got clearanced)
Is it mostly online? That's the only thing I can think.
I mean, I realize the country is double the population that is 40 years ago. And they are likely selling internationally (especially online)
Amazon?
Quote from: JeremyR on January 26, 2025, 02:15:15 AMI just find it hard to believe it's selling so well compared to the early days of D&D. What stores sell it? Back in the day, you'd find it in book stores and toy stores along with hobby shops on top of game stores.
We don't even have toy stores anymore, not many book stores and hobby shops seems to double down on other stuff instead of games. At work (Walmart) we had the starter set, but got clearanced)
Is it mostly online? That's the only thing I can think.
I mean, I realize the country is double the population that is 40 years ago. And they are likely selling internationally (especially online)
On that front, it's sold at Target, Walmart, Barnes and Noble, and of course Amazon. In addition to game stores, which get a three week jump on all that competition and special alternate covers to encourage suckers like me to buy it direct from the game store instead of cheaper on Amazon.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 26, 2025, 11:59:42 AMOn that front, it's sold at Target, Walmart, Barnes and Noble, and of course Amazon. In addition to game stores, which get a three week jump on all that competition and special alternate covers to encourage suckers like me to buy it direct from the game store instead of cheaper on Amazon.
Show some (self)respect! You're not a sucker... You're a valued whale! :)
Every game store I've been in generally has an "official 5e game" - mostly to generate sales of books. 2 or 3 various D20 games, and the odd old school game or one of the various clones, with maybe one in five players (at best) being female.
The problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition
The game is very much recognizable as D&D. It uses much the same system and plays in much the same way as it did last decade. Changing a few flavor bits doesn't alter that it is still D&D, but it might not be a D&D with the same flavor as the older stuff. You don't like the new flavor? OK, but New Coke is still Coke.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMThe game is very much recognizable as D&D.
I would say that stuff like Radiant Citadel and Strixhaven are practically unrecognizable from what D&D was up until a few years ago. Maybe your games involved working as baristas but I don't remember anything like that.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 06:14:23 AMQuote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMThe game is very much recognizable as D&D.
I would say that stuff like Radiant Citadel and Strixhaven are practically unrecognizable from what D&D was up until a few years ago. Maybe your games involved working as baristas but I don't remember anything like that.
If the customers have stats, you can still kill them and take their stuff, right?
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:18:53 AMIf the customers have stats, you can still kill them and take their stuff, right?
Let's play as baristas so we can kill the customers and take their stuff. Maybe your D&D games were different from mine or any I ever saw. I don't recall so much food centric content. More going to dungeons and killing dragons.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
They're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 06:14:23 AMQuote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMThe game is very much recognizable as D&D.
I would say that stuff like Radiant Citadel and Strixhaven are practically unrecognizable from what D&D was up until a few years ago. Maybe your games involved working as baristas but I don't remember anything like that.
I can't speak for Strixhaven, which as a Magic The Gathering setting cross-over book we've never used as we don't play that campaign setting. I think it was marketed specifically to draw some MTG fans over to D&D.
But I can speak to Radiant Citadel. I would say claims like that about Radiant Citadel might be a sign you never read it or played it, and are operating off rumors of rumors. Radiant Citadel has some solidly good modules in it. I say modules because it's just a book of short adventures akin to the old modules. For example, we played through the "Sins of Our Elders" adventure in that book, which is based on medieval Korea. Excellent adventure. We had a blast. I think lots of old school players would enjoy that adventure. Reminded me of an old 2e adventure I once played.
What is it you think is in Radiant Citadel that you believe to be "practically unrecognizable from what D&D was?" I know there was a RUMOR it had adventures that supported a battle wheelchair, but that rumor turned out to be false. There was a rumor it was "woke" but even the one author who supposedly wrote a "woke" adventure got all upset his adventure was edited to remove that stuff, so that was also a false rumor. So what is it you think is actually in the book that is unrecognizable as D&D?
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMThey're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
No, they're pink haired angry middle aged adults who think they're courting 11-14 year olds because they know what was allegedgly cool... in 2003. Admittedly, I'm not sure they're any more correct than balding (almost)retirees in their 50s and 60s though but that group isn't actually shooting for that demographic specifically; they're just hoping/grateful if just some of them join along for the ride. :)
FWIW, I finally got to look at the PHB this past weekend and I see why there are complaints about the art throughout the book. Of course I've seen the cringe with mexican orcs and dwarf baker twinks but I was also surprised by how inconsistent the styles and asthetics were for basically the entire industry's flagship product effectively. And then there are the (for me) previously unknown cringe pieces like victorian cosplayers shooting up Castle Ravenloft that made me do a literal triple take that it was in D&D and not some sort of Cthulhu by Gaslight indy rpg instead as well as the second most popular pose/expression in the color art being a magical combat O-face that looked like it could have been a still from a fantasy version of the old SNL "jizz in my pants" music video skit...
Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 25, 2025, 06:24:21 AMQuote from: Anon Adderlan on January 25, 2025, 12:03:04 AMQuote from: Mistwell on January 23, 2025, 02:48:43 PMThey discovered, accidentally, that by scaling down the number of products they published, the remaining books they did publish sold a lot more. In fact they were not losing in total sales by producing 3-4 books per year versus producing far more books per year. The prior TSR policy of selling 60 books per year was cannibalizing book sales from each other, and to some extent that had been still happening with 3e and even 4e. Even though they knew signs of this problem had been seen in 1998's surveys.
The fact a company's own products can be competing against each other shows just how much of a zero sum game this market actually is. And lots of designers seem to be in complete denial of this.
Not necessarily. It's possible to saturate a market. We saw it with X-Wing Miniatures. The game was very sucessful and very popular, so FFG started pumping out expansions. Eventually they covered all the major aspects of gameplay, and everyone had plenty of ships. They painted themselves into a corner, so to speak.
This exact same thing happened with repainted D$D minis. From Harbinger through about 2006, WotC constantly sold through the print runs very quickly. 4E, amongst other things was also meant to push a new edition of the D&D mini game. Just like the new rpg, the revised "4E" d$d mini game killed the line.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 25, 2025, 07:40:52 PMAccording to this article (https://www.geekwire.com/2023/dungeons-dragons-in-2023-wizards-of-the-coast-reveals-planescape-revival-and-more/), "According to Wizards' internal studies of the player population, 60% of D&D players are male, 39% are female, and 1% identify otherwise" That's supposedly from January 2023.
That's just D&D beyond demo data. They haven't done a "real" survey since '99.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:18:53 AMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 06:14:23 AMQuote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMThe game is very much recognizable as D&D.
I would say that stuff like Radiant Citadel and Strixhaven are practically unrecognizable from what D&D was up until a few years ago. Maybe your games involved working as baristas but I don't remember anything like that.
If the customers have stats, you can still kill them and take their stuff, right?
Game on! Stuffershack employees having been dying in Shadowrun for 35 years, bout time for the fantasy baristas to have a taste.
Quote from: RNGm on January 27, 2025, 03:38:27 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMThey're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
No, they're pink haired angry middle aged adults who think they're courting 11-14 year olds because they know what was allegedgly cool... in 2003. Admittedly, I'm not sure they're any more correct than balding (almost)retirees in their 50s and 60s though but that group isn't actually shooting for that demographic specifically; they're just hoping/grateful if just some of them join along for the ride. :)
Again, do you have better evidence than what WOTC has from their extensive surveys that their fastest growing customer base is 11 to 14 year olds?
Quote from: M2A0 on January 27, 2025, 06:14:32 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 25, 2025, 07:40:52 PMAccording to this article (https://www.geekwire.com/2023/dungeons-dragons-in-2023-wizards-of-the-coast-reveals-planescape-revival-and-more/), "According to Wizards' internal studies of the player population, 60% of D&D players are male, 39% are female, and 1% identify otherwise" That's supposedly from January 2023.
That's just D&D beyond demo data. They haven't done a "real" survey since '99.
Bro, the quantities of respondents makes the 99 survey look like a toy. It was a larger survey than any in the history of TTRPGs.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 06:21:46 PMQuote from: M2A0 on January 27, 2025, 06:14:32 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 25, 2025, 07:40:52 PMAccording to this article (https://www.geekwire.com/2023/dungeons-dragons-in-2023-wizards-of-the-coast-reveals-planescape-revival-and-more/), "According to Wizards' internal studies of the player population, 60% of D&D players are male, 39% are female, and 1% identify otherwise" That's supposedly from January 2023.
That's just D&D beyond demo data. They haven't done a "real" survey since '99.
Bro, the quantities of respondents makes the 99 survey look like a toy. It was a larger survey than any in the history of TTRPGs.
Even though it's a bigger set, that doesn't necessarily mean that it's more representative of the full D&D playing population. The 1999 survey is the only one publicly released where they weren't just going to gathering places, but actually mailing people in their homes to see if they played D&D (or other games).
The problem is that the subset of D&D players at any given venue (i.e. game conventions, game stores, or D&D Beyond) isn't necessarily the same as people who play casually with their friends at home.
Quote from: M2A0 on January 27, 2025, 06:10:53 PMThis exact same thing happened with repainted D$D minis. From Harbinger through about 2006, WotC constantly sold through the print runs very quickly. 4E, amongst other things was also meant to push a new edition of the D&D mini game. Just like the new rpg, the revised "4E" d$d mini game killed the line.
Not really. It wasn't oversaturation as there was still plenty of excitement for the game locally, at GenCon, and online right up until that point; prices had gone up (both for production and the end consumer) and paint steps for common/uncommon figs had gone down but there was still lots of genuine demand. What killed DDM was that they had literally over 800 minis at the time (14? sets of 60 minis each) and they said they'd only restat 60 of them for the 4e version of the minis game.. but we could vote for which 60! They eventually backtracked on that and said they'd restat them all but the damage was done. With 4e landing with all the success of a wad of wet toilet paper splat once players got their hands on the full rules along with 4e's own version of the original OGL scandal, pretty much every use for them as well as the excitement dried up for them.
My local FLGS scene went from playing twice weekly with about a dozen players each day (we literally had to set up a second day for overflow!) to being dead within a year. Myself, I had full collections (and still do!) of those first 14 or 15 sets but the last 2-3 sets (basically corresponding with whichever one was the official switchover to the 4e rules) I only picked up a few figs on the secondary market as I had lost interest.
Wait, are you all saying that a WotC source quoted by known WotC shill Mistwell, has discrepancies?
Say it ain't so.....
Quote from: jeff37923 on January 27, 2025, 07:06:07 PMWait, are you all saying that a WotC source quoted by known WotC shill Mistwell, has discrepancies?
Say it ain't so.....
I am glad someone said it and not me.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMThey're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Looks like they are courting the same crowd that Marvel was courting with their silly lifestyle shows and shows like Agatha All Along.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
They're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Then WotC is doomed. Because none of the 11-14 year-olds I have encountered want to play fantasy barista. They want to kill monsters and take their stuff (even the girls).
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 27, 2025, 10:45:48 PMThen WotC is doomed. Because none of the 11-14 year-olds I have encountered want to play fantasy barista. They want to kill monsters and take their stuff (even the girls).
It's funny. The activist types want to change the game to be more accomidating for women players, but they rarely think to ask what the women actually playing the game want.
It's like it's not about appealing to women, but appealing to a certain ideology...
Quote from: jeff37923 on January 27, 2025, 07:06:07 PMWait, are you all saying that a WotC source quoted by known WotC shill Mistwell, has discrepancies?
Say it ain't so.....
Jeff, he doesn't work for WOTC. He used to. He's no longer under any NDA. So when he did an interview, he was very frank with information people had not previously heard.
Yes, some of what he said is disputed by 1) prior numbers WOTC released, and 2) Mike Mearls, who also is an ex-employee (though more recently left WOTC).
People here appear to be believing the WOTC numbers (which said 39% women) over the ex-employee's numbers (who said 50%). And you are taking a cheap shot not even realizing it's not me believing WOTC (I have no idea which is right) it's YOU.
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 27, 2025, 10:45:48 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
They're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Then WotC is doomed. Because none of the 11-14 year-olds I have encountered want to play fantasy barista. They want to kill monsters and take their stuff (even the girls).
Oh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
I mean, that attitude sure explains a lot about a lot of opinions found here.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMQuote from: Eirikrautha on January 27, 2025, 10:45:48 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
They're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Then WotC is doomed. Because none of the 11-14 year-olds I have encountered want to play fantasy barista. They want to kill monsters and take their stuff (even the girls).
Oh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
I mean, that attitude sure explains a lot about a lot of opinions found here.
I'll trust my experience over your shilling any day of the week. Why would I trust you, Winninger, or WotC? Your attitude sure explains why a lot of people are ignoring those who demand they believe ideologically based assertions, and not their lying eyes...
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMOh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
His assertion has just as much basis as yours.
are they gonna deport that know nothing poser retard guy who said rule zero is shit, even though he went hard on shilling for shadowderp, which requires rule zero because of its one sentence ahem "rules"?
because that shit would break my fuckin heart.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMOh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
Welcome to the Internet! Come and take a seat (c)
People new to the hobby have no idea what a good product is because all they've ever seen is what WOTC puts out. That's sad.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 28, 2025, 12:27:28 AMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMOh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
His assertion has just as much basis as yours.
Eirikrautha is the guy that repeatedly mentions that the multiple of anecdote =/= data, so his argument here seems out of place.
Quote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition
The game is very much recognizable as D&D. It uses much the same system and plays in much the same way as it did last decade. Changing a few flavor bits doesn't alter that it is still D&D, but it might not be a D&D with the same flavor as the older stuff. You don't like the new flavor? OK, but New Coke is still Coke.
Terrible analogy because the public DEMANDED Coca Cola switch back to the original recipe, and they did.
Much like D&D today: they fucked with the recipe and it's terrible.
Quote from: blackstone on January 28, 2025, 01:35:25 PMMuch like D&D today: they fucked with the recipe and it's terrible.
Wait, you don't like the Camel-Semen Shots from the gay dwarf baristas? I hear it gives you Advantage.
Quote from: tenbones on January 28, 2025, 01:37:47 PMQuote from: blackstone on January 28, 2025, 01:35:25 PMMuch like D&D today: they fucked with the recipe and it's terrible.
Wait, you don't like the Camel-Semen Shots from the gay dwarf baristas? I hear it gives you Advantage.
I just threw up in my mouth a little...
An Original Recipe fan...
Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 27, 2025, 11:54:30 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMQuote from: Eirikrautha on January 27, 2025, 10:45:48 PMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 03:27:16 PMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition in an attempt to appeal to people who don't care about D&D, never cared about D&D and never will care about D&D. The modern audience isn't coming no matter how many gay gnome kings they shove into adventures. They don't care about ttrpgs and never will. The few who even know or care about these changes only like them because they hate us and we don't like them. They are just petty, vindictive, malicious people who want to dunk on "the chuds". They like it that they are taking away and ruining our thing. They don't actually care about the thing beyond that. That they think they can take away D&D shows that they have no understanding of how this hobby even works.
They're courting 11-14 year olds, not the pink haired angry adults you imagine they're courting.
Then WotC is doomed. Because none of the 11-14 year-olds I have encountered want to play fantasy barista. They want to kill monsters and take their stuff (even the girls).
Oh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
I mean, that attitude sure explains a lot about a lot of opinions found here.
I'll trust my experience over your shilling any day of the week. Why would I trust you, Winninger, or WotC? Your attitude sure explains why a lot of people are ignoring those who demand they believe ideologically based assertions, and not their lying eyes...
I never said or implied you should trust my personal experience. I never mentioned my personal experience.
I also didn't say you should trust WOTC. You in fact trusted them more than I did, by implication, when you agreed with their numbers over Winningers.
Winninger at least has zero reason to be lying about this particular topic right now. If anything, having been fired from WOTC and now competing with them, you'd think he'd have incentive to make them look bad, right?
So while I don't 100% trust what he says (Mike Mearls disputed one thing he said), I think he does know more than you would about their current audience having been privy to private data you have not had access to. He's also played the game in more places around the nation than you have, and more often than you have. So even just on personal experience, he'd know better.
If you'd like to know my own instincts on the matter, which should be taken with a grain of salt? I'd guess the WOTC 39% female number is likely more accurate and I think Winninger probably got that wrong. He probably confused it with 50% of the "new" audience is female, which isn't the "entire" audience.
Quote from: yosemitemike on January 28, 2025, 12:27:28 AMQuote from: Mistwell on January 27, 2025, 11:26:37 PMOh well YOU have not encountered it so it must not be happening. Because the entire fucking world revolves around your tiny bubble of experience, right?
His assertion has just as much basis as yours.
What assertion do you think I made? I didn't make any. I never once mentioned my personal experience as evidence for the mix of genders/sexes in the game. I've literally only played in LA for my experience with 5e so my experience is definitely not representative of the entire nation.
My "assertion" is just Winninger mentioned a 50% female number based on data he saw, and WOTC mentioned a 39% female number based on data they claimed supported that. That's it. I never made an assertion of my own. It's hilarious y'all think I am shilling for someone, when literally only you guys have made assertions, and they're all based on your personal experience and you outright state you're biased. You're the clear OSR anti-WOTC shills here. I didn't even focus on the male/female ratio when I posted the interview summary and didn't think that was an interesting claim he made.
Quote from: blackstone on January 28, 2025, 01:35:25 PMQuote from: HappyDaze on January 27, 2025, 06:03:43 AMQuote from: yosemitemike on January 27, 2025, 05:42:41 AMThe problem is that they are contorting the game almost beyond recognition
The game is very much recognizable as D&D. It uses much the same system and plays in much the same way as it did last decade. Changing a few flavor bits doesn't alter that it is still D&D, but it might not be a D&D with the same flavor as the older stuff. You don't like the new flavor? OK, but New Coke is still Coke.
Terrible analogy because the public DEMANDED Coca Cola switch back to the original recipe, and they did.
Much like D&D today: they fucked with the recipe and it's terrible.
It's beyond terrible. They took a fantastic compromise edition and filled it full of identity politics & a barely concealed hatred for long term fans of the game.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 28, 2025, 03:18:51 PMWinninger at least has zero reason to be lying about this particular topic right now. If anything, having been fired from WOTC and now competing with them, you'd think he'd have incentive to make them look bad, right?
The purple haired cancel mob (i.e. your former co-workers and probably current comrades/frenemies) potentially banging on your door (whether physical or virtually) because you went against the narrative the company has pushed for years is potentially one powerful reason. You might think just staying quiet would be a solution but as a SWM with no boxes ticked you have to be diligent in your signaling frequency especially now in the era of Orange Man Bad 2: TDS Boogaloo.
There is no WOTC propaganda that Mistwell will not espouse as gospel truth.
Quote from: Lord Hobie on January 28, 2025, 06:27:42 PMThere is no WOTC propaganda that Mistwell will not espouse as gospel truth.
Facts.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 28, 2025, 03:59:38 PMWhat assertion do you think I made?
That it is happening. You made that assertion regardless of what weasel wording you used.
Quote from: Mistwell on January 28, 2025, 03:18:51 PMI never said or implied you should trust my personal experience.
So, what did you say without the evasions and weasel wording?
Quote from: Lord Hobie on January 28, 2025, 06:27:42 PMThere is no WOTC propaganda that Mistwell will not espouse as gospel truth.
But he never asserted that! LOL
Quote from: blackstone on January 28, 2025, 01:35:25 PMTerrible analogy because the public DEMANDED Coca Cola switch back to the original recipe, and they did.
Off topic, but I personally believe the switch to New Coke and back was to hide the transition from cane sugar to high fructose corn syrup. The people never questioned it, possibly the greatest bait & switch in corporate history.