# So...How are Sales of 4E Product?



## Gallo22 (Nov 4, 2008)

Since 4E has been out for awhile now, I've been curious to know how sales are for WotC 4E products?  Good?  Poor?  Fair?


----------



## WayneLigon (Nov 4, 2008)

I'm not sure how the latest offereings are selling, but my FLGS actually overordered on the three main books. On the street date, they put them out and were sold out inside of two hours. He said people he'd _never _seen before were showing up to get their core books. They've kept up a steady stream of sales of the core, at least.


----------



## megamania (Nov 4, 2008)

From what I have seen, not so well.    The store owner has heard it be suggested that urban areas are selling 4e very well while rural areas are sticking with 3.5.

I wonder if that has to do with economic conditions / general money or if that is even true.


----------



## Crothian (Nov 4, 2008)

Around here they seem to be selling well.  I see them being restocked.  I'm also suprised I haven't seen any at the used book stores.  I figured there would be some people who bought them and didn't like them so would sell them.  There are tons of 3.5 books though at the used books stores.


----------



## jdrakeh (Nov 4, 2008)

I think that Mike Mearls issued a statement early on, shortly after the game's release, stating that it had outsold _all_ previous editions of D&D (in total units) at that time.


----------



## thalmin (Nov 4, 2008)

Initial sales on the gift set were incredible! PHBs have sold well. But I seriously overbought DMGs and MMs (I didn't decrease their numbers when I increased the gift sets on my preorders.)
Current sales on core books are slow. Forgotten Realms books have sold pretty well, and the Adventurer's Vault has been very good. DM Screens have been a big seller, with continued strong sales.
Character Record Sheets have been a disappointment.
Starter Sets have sold well.
Dungeon tiles have also had very strong sales.

These are our results, not meant to be a blanket statement on state of the industry.


----------



## D'karr (Nov 4, 2008)

thalmin said:


> Character Record Sheets have been a disappointment.




That product was a disappointment.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Nov 4, 2008)

Amazon's best books of 2008


----------



## Herremann the Wise (Nov 4, 2008)

Scott_Rouse said:


> Amazon's best books of 2008




No. 25 for the gift set on the Amazon best sellers list 2008 is very impressive. Well done!

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise


----------



## FriarRosing (Nov 4, 2008)

I bought the gift set and my players each bought a player's handbook without complaining, which was a first ("too much money!" et cetera, et cetera). 

Buying the Fourth Edition books also inspired me to start buying books of the older editions too. Not that that really means anything.

But all the local book stores seem to have sold them out pretty fast. Or, sold out the PHBs, anyway. My local gaming store was out of PHBs for a long time, and after it came out they sold out of the Adventurer's Vault and Dungeon Master's Screen pretty fast too. They're well stocked on modules, though.


----------



## darjr (Nov 4, 2008)

HA! Punked! 25th highest selling book on Amazon through October. Dude, congratulations. Does this mean the hobby isn't dead?

This is a win for all of us.


----------



## Dragonbait (Nov 4, 2008)

I know that 4E is the first time every player in every group I belong to purchased their own copy. Many of the players played 3ed and never bought a single book (cheap bums.. grumble).

I wonder what the ratio is of PH sold vs. DMGs and MMs, since only 1 player would normally require the DMG and MM, whereas everyone would want a copyof the PH?


----------



## darjr (Nov 4, 2008)

You know, I'm fanatical about hitting the used book sellers. I have not seen a 4e book in any of them yet. Could be they get them, but they must go pretty fast then.

In my immediate area... anecdotal an all.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 4, 2008)

When we first began talking about buying our books, we had an order for 6 PHBs, 3 DMGs, and 3 MMS. When we actually ordered our books, we ended up with 6 Gift Sets instead.


----------



## Holy Bovine (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> You know, I'm fanatical about hitting the used book sellers. I have not seen a 4e book in any of them yet. Could be they get them, but they must go pretty fast then.
> 
> In my immediate area... anecdotal an all.




Yeah!  Where are all the haters dumping their books at my local used bookstore?!  Promises were made! 

My FLGSs (I know nothing about the two UFLGS in my area) seem to sell the 4E stuff pretty fast.  I got the last copy of AV just 3 days after it was released (and they said they ordered a lot).  They haven't had any problems keeping all of the books in stock either.  I think they would agree with Thalmin about what was hot vs not (especially the Character Record Sheets - major disappointment!).


----------



## Holy Bovine (Nov 5, 2008)

The Little Raven said:


> When we first began talking about buying our books, we had an order for 6 PHBs, 3 DMGs, and 3 MMS. When we actually ordered our books, we ended up with 6 Gift Sets instead.




I love my gift set.  Best purchase of the year for me!  My wife liked the extra PHB I got as she doesn't have to borrow anyone's now.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Nov 5, 2008)

This is far from any kind of definite, but whenever I visit the Silver Snail (quite a big/well known Comic/Hobby/Game-Store in Toronto) I almost always see someone looking through a 4e book/buying it.


----------



## Holy Bovine (Nov 5, 2008)

Fallen Seraph said:


> This is far from any kind of definite, but whenever I visit the Silver Snail (quite a big/well known Comic/Hobby/Game-Store in Toronto) I almost always see someone looking through a 4e book/buying it.




The Silver Snail is a gaming Mecca.  Anyone who visits Toronto should visit.  Prices are only so-so but the selection is incredible!


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 5, 2008)

Initial sales of the first three books were very high, but initial sales of D&D will almost always be very high. I've said before that they could have taken FATAL and slapped D&D on the cover and it probably would've broken sales records for the core books, and I'll stand beside that. 

After that, it's harder to say. About all we, the curious public, can go with is what store owners might care to tell us.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Nov 5, 2008)

Holy Bovine said:


> The Silver Snail is a gaming Mecca.  Anyone who visits Toronto should visit.  Prices are only so-so but the selection is incredible!



It was great went during the FanExpo late-night sale, and not only were they selling the Boxed Set at American Prices but at 40% off! 

Though their AC cut out from the amount of people, so was extremely hot but they were quite nice and bought water bottles for all of us.

And, yes, I quite agree anyone who is into gaming, or well any nerdy stuff should visit it. Two stories of awesomeness, it is quite easy to find too the whole front of the building is painted up with superheroes, etc. It is also on Queen St. West one of the best/most interesting places to shop.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> After that, it's harder to say. About all we, the curious public, can go with is what store owners might care to tell us.




And google putting it in the top 25 books of 2008. No matter how you slice it, that is not just baked potatoes.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 5, 2008)

dajr said:
			
		

> And google putting it in the top 25 books of 2008. No matter how you slice it, that is not just baked potatoes.




Those are some good sales, to be sure...but...



			
				Me said:
			
		

> Initial sales of D&D will almost always be very high....They could have taken FATAL and slapped D&D on the cover and it probably would've broken sales records


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> Those are some good sales, to be sure...but...




Thats what I was responding too. That ranking would NOT have happened if it was Fatal with D&D slapped on it, imho.


----------



## Cadfan (Nov 5, 2008)

Lets make sure we're 100% clear on where this debate stands:

Evidence for 4e selling well: All relevant evidence in existence. 
Evidence for some nebulous, future collapse of 4e: None.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Further, in my particular case, which is far from unique, I bought a second PHB because one was just not enough. Fatal with D&D slapped on it would not have gotten me to do that.

Fatal with D&D pasted on the cover, after sales like this, would have lots of 4e books in the used book stores, collecting dust. It hasn't, because, I'll bet, that many of those books are being used.

I'm not sure I understand where your coming from saying that Fatal with D&D on it would even be a vital product, not to mention the top selling RPG.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> Lets make sure we're 100% clear on where this debate stands:
> 
> Evidence for 4e selling well: All relevant evidence in existence.
> Evidence for some nebulous, future collapse of 4e: None.




Well, sure, if you want to go and use things like facts and evidence, how inconvenient.


----------



## jdrakeh (Nov 5, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> Lets make sure we're 100% clear on where this debate stands:
> 
> Evidence for 4e selling well: All relevant evidence in existence.
> Evidence for some nebulous, future collapse of 4e: None.




Thhhpt! Off with you and your logic!


----------



## ShinHakkaider (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> Further, in my particular case, which is far from unique, I bought a second PHB because one was just not enough. Fatal with D&D slapped on it would not have gotten me to do that.
> 
> Fatal with D&D pasted on the cover, after sales like this, would have lots of 4e books in the used book stores, collecting dust. It hasn't, because, I'll bet, that many of those books are being used.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand where your coming from saying that Fatal with D&D on it would even be a vital product, not to mention the top selling RPG.




I think what he's saying is that D&D as a brand name would be a strong seller no matter what is between the covers. A new edition of D&D is pretty much going to sell like hot cakes no matter what. 

Also I'm not sure because alot of books were sold that theyre being used. I bought the gift set from amazon, but I'm not a 4E fan at all. I did want to give the game a fair shake and have my own materials when I did so. But as of right now the gift set sits on my gaming shelf, right next to my GURPS, HERO SYSTEM and M&M materials. I ran one game of 4E and probably wont run another. 

The games selling great for WOTC isnt really news, what I'm more interested in is the longevity of the game, i.e how many of the people who bought the game are actually playing and enjoying the game and will be doing so in the years to come.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

ShinHakkaider,

I get that a lot of books will sit on shelves. I get that D&D would sell a lot even if it was fatal. What I don't think is being understood is that the sales numbers are FAR past that expectation.

Around here we use to have only one store running RPGA games, it's expanded to two other stores and a few more days of the month, and it still may not be enough for everyone that wants to play.

I don't see the books showing up around here in the used market. If it was Fatal with D&D slapped on it would you have even kept your copy? I sure would not have.

What in the name of the scintillating stars would have to happen for some people to recognize that 4e is more, maybe much more, than 'just' a game, with D&D slapped on it, selling as expected?

It's getting a little ridiculous.


----------



## Shemeska (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> What in the name of the scintillating stars would have to happen for some people to recognize that 4e is more, maybe much more, than 'just' a game, with D&D slapped on it, selling as expected?
> 
> It's getting a little ridiculous.




For me to see it actually selling well in my area, especially so for books beyond the core PHB/DMG/MM. At least in my area, it hasn't made a gigantic splash from when I've talked about it with a friend of mine who works at the game store I frequent, though it has managed to royally alienate just about every FR fan he and I know.

We can compare anecdotes all day long about our own demographic bubbles and if 4e is or isn't doing well therein, but without hard sales figures for various books we can't draw solid conclusions at this stage.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Shemeska said:


> We can compare anecdotes all day long about our own demographic bubbles and if 4e is or isn't doing well therein, but without hard sales figures for various books we can't draw solid conclusions at this stage.




It's kinda funny (or sad, rather)

When Mona comes and says that Pathfinder is doing awesome and that Paizo hasn't stopped gaining more customers and selling since the announcement of the PFRPG, not a single soul questions his motives, nor his veracity. It's a fact.

Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well, all the nay-sayers keep questioning these statements, claiming there are no hard facts.

sigh


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well, all the nay-sayers keep questioning these statements, claiming there are no hard facts.




I'm skeptical. Link, please?


----------



## Angellis_ater (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> It's kinda funny (or sad, rather)
> 
> When Mona comes and says that Pathfinder is doing awesome and that Paizo hasn't stopped gaining more customers and selling since the announcement of the PFRPG, not a single soul questions his motives, nor his veracity. It's a fact.
> 
> ...




Yeah, that is kinda weird. But then I guess more 4E detractors take an interest in 4E threads, than the Pathfinder detractors. I'm personally happy that BOTH Paizo and Wizards are selling well and hope that their sales will continue to increase, because with more sales comes more income for 3PPs and more players for all of us.


----------



## Truth Seeker (Nov 5, 2008)

*This is found*, make of it, as you will.



Gallo22 said:


> Since 4E has been out for awhile now, I've been curious to know how sales are for WotC 4E products? Good? Poor? Fair?


----------



## Kishin (Nov 5, 2008)

I imagine well, since its been said to have gone through several print runs at this point.



Jack99 said:


> It's kinda funny (or sad, rather)
> 
> When Mona comes and says that Pathfinder is doing awesome and that Paizo hasn't stopped gaining more customers and selling since the announcement of the PFRPG, not a single soul questions his motives, nor his veracity. It's a fact.
> 
> ...




Hi. Welcome to the internet. We have cupcakes.


----------



## doctorhook (Nov 5, 2008)

D'karr said:


> That product was a disappointment.



I bought a copy, expecting it to be similar to the 3E Character Sheet products. (ie: A dozen or so character sheets, tailored to each class, plus a couple extras). However, from the look of the 4E version, I got the impression that WotC would have every player purchase another copy for each character they play. As cool as the blank cards inside are, the product was NOT worth $10, IMO.

I hope 4E is selling well and continues to sell well! It's my favorite edition so far!


----------



## Campbell (Nov 5, 2008)

I think the sales figures for Martial Power is a decent bellwether of how well 4e is doing and how much 4e is being actively played.

It's in the core product line so it isn't effected by the more narrow market for setting specific supplements.
It's gameplay focused (so it isn't effected by the reader market in the same way that the Draconomicon or the Manual of the Planes would be).
It's marketed to players, not DMs (so it captures a good deal of the market).

Currently (on Amazon.com at least) Martial Power is ranked

#372 in Books
#31 in Books > Science Fiction and Fantasy
#1 in Books > Science Fiction & Fantasy > Gaming
#1 in Books > Entertainment > Puzzles & Games > Role Playing & Fantasy

Take from that what you will.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 5, 2008)

Truth Seeker said:


> *This is found*, make of it, as you will.




Cool stuff. Looks like it's not blogged much about anymore, but sales are still doing fine (I wonder what the low points where - was it a time where the book was outsold? Seems unlikely, this shouldn't affect preorders much, should it? - or is it just a too small timeframe to make really sense of it?)


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Delta said:


> I'm skeptical. Link, please?




They have been provided about 150 times on these boards. It's from an Ampersand article, mearls' private blog, and rouses' blog at wotc. If no one else has bothered, I will dig them out when I get home.


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> They have been provided about 150 times on these boards. It's from an Ampersand article, mearls' private blog, and rouses' blog at wotc. If no one else has bothered, I will dig them out when I get home.




That'll be helpful.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Okay. Here is what we know.

From Mearls (Link), we know that the initial print run is bigger than both the intial 3.0 and 3.5 print run. 



> Ha! We also didn't mention Gamma World or Amazing Engine, so I guess 4e didn't outsell either of those.
> 
> Print run size:
> 
> 3.0 < 3.5 < 4e




From Scott, we know a bit more about the size. They filled 39 big trucks (estimates from pictures vary from 750k-2M books)

Link to thread

We know from this press release (Link) that not only was 1st print run of 4e bigger than 3.5's first print run, but a whooping 50% bigger. We also learn that this 4e print run was sold out on may 30th already. That's a week before the book was even released.

We also have an abundance of stats from amazon.com, with the 4e core books rising higher than any other roleplaying books ever have. Not to mention record spots on the NYT bestseller list. Ever seen other RPG's on that? 

Then we have this, from the boss himself.



			
				Bill Slavicsek in Ampersand said:
			
		

> As I write this, it’s the two-month anniversary of the launch of the 4th Edition of Dungeons & Dragons. I thought I’d take a moment to tell you how we’re doing. The excitement around the new edition is still as strong as it was at launch, and we anticipate carrying that excitement through Gen Con, PAX, and beyond as new products roll out and the full scope of the power of the edition becomes evident. From a business perspective, the core rulebooks are already well into their third printing, the H1 and H2 adventures are both in reprint. The new Dungeon Tiles product, DU1 Halls of the Giant Kings, is almost gone from our inventory less than one month after going on sale. This means that, using the current trends, *we’re going to crush our original projections for 4th Edition in 2008*!





Now, put that together, and to me, it spells success.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Okay. Here is what we know.
> 
> From Mearls (Link), we know that the initial print run is bigger than both the intial 3.0 and 3.5 print run.
> 
> ...




Sorry, but all this evidence sounds too good to be true! I bet the sales drop immediately after the last post in this regard, and the later books don't sell at all, and that we just don't see any books on the secondary market because people simply BURNED them angrily after reading them the first time...

D&D 4 can only loose steem after people have actually read the books!











Spelling intentional


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Now, put that together, and to me, it spells success.




That's fine. But my original point was specifically regarding this: "Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well..."

So, I don't see any quotes from any of them about "selling well" or "breaking records", which seems to get bandied about a lot. From what I can tell they dance very carefully around the sales issue, talking mostly about print runs.

I'll remain skeptical that any of them actually said that sales records are being broken; I still have yet to see such a quote.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 5, 2008)

Delta said:


> That's fine. But my original point was specifically regarding this: "Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well..."
> 
> So, I don't see any quotes from any of them about "selling well" or "breaking records", which seems to get bandied about a lot. From what I can tell they dance very carefully around the sales issue, talking mostly about print runs.
> 
> I'll remain skeptical that any of them actually said that sales records are being broken; I still have yet to see such a quote.




Actually, they don't describe it explicitly as "breaking records", but exceeding 3E print runs and exceeding their own expectations is "breaking records" - unless we assume that 3E didn't set any records (for D&D) to exceed. 

Exceeding expectations automatically means "selling well", since all their economical planning will be based on their expectations, and this means they make more money then they expected. If that is not selling well, then what is?


----------



## Phaezen (Nov 5, 2008)

Delta said:


> That's fine. But my original point was specifically regarding this: "Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well..."
> 
> So, I don't see any quotes from any of them about "selling well" or "breaking records", which seems to get bandied about a lot. From what I can tell they dance very carefully around the sales issue, talking mostly about print runs.
> 
> I'll remain skeptical that any of them actually said that sales records are being broken; I still have yet to see such a quote.




Speaking as someone who works in publishing, a new edition of a book with an initial print run 50% higher than the previous edition, selling out a week before street date can be considered as "selling extremely well...", we would most likely use stronger language in the office.

Phaezen


----------



## Khuxan (Nov 5, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Cool stuff. Looks like it's not blogged much about anymore, but sales are still doing fine (I wonder what the low points where - was it a time where the book was outsold? Seems unlikely, this shouldn't affect preorders much, should it? - or is it just a too small timeframe to make really sense of it?)




It's Halloween. People probably bought spooky stuff instead of D&D stuff. We know that it only takes a few dozen purchases to change sales rank by hundreds of places.


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> We also learn that this 4e print run was sold out on may 30th already. That's a week before the book was even released.




So multiple people are pointing to this: It was sold out before it went on sale. What exactly does that mean? The linked article uses the phrase "sell-in", as in, "Sell-in for _4th Edition_ turned out to be considerably higher than for _3.5". _

So apparently that must not be end-customer sales, right? That's talking about orders from store owners, I presume? 

But when most of us laypersons ask about "sales" we're asking about end-customer purchases, and I don't see anyone at WOTC talking about that (apparently). You can't seriously tell me that all the books were sold out before they went on sale, that's a logical contradiction.


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Actually, they don't describe it explicitly as "breaking records", but exceeding 3E print runs and exceeding their own expectations is "breaking records" - unless we assume that 3E didn't set any records (for D&D) to exceed.




I agree. And they were exceedingly careful to avoid mentioning 1E/2E in those comments. The PR "smell test" here only bolsters my skepticism.

My guess is in fact that 1E still holds the PHB sales record. Despite rumor, WOTC still hasn't said otherwise, and they still haven't said 4E sales are record-breaking.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 5, 2008)

Delta said:


> I agree. And they were exceedingly careful to avoid mentioning 1E/2E in those comments. The PR "smell test" here only bolsters my skepticism.
> 
> My guess is in fact that 1E still holds the PHB sales record. Despite rumor, WOTC still hasn't said otherwise, and they still haven't said 4E sales are record-breaking.




I really have no (good) idea how well earlier editions then 3rd might have sold. I am not sure how the market situation of RPGs was then, but don't you think the initial print runs then where smaller then they are today? Especially since today international distribution is probably a lot easier and more common (with all those ways to order your books easily via the web)

Of course, if you compare the first 6 (?) months of 4E to the entire span of 1E, I wouldn't be surprised if 1E sold more in that time. But does it make any sense to compare these different time frames? 

Or do you expect that the change in sales over time to not be a consistent pattern, and be different depending on editions? But regardless of whether you do, if the pattern is inconsistent, then we don't have any data for that and can only talk about the shorter time frame 4E has been around.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Delta said:


> I agree. And they were exceedingly careful to avoid mentioning 1E/2E in those comments. The PR "smell test" here only bolsters my skepticism.
> 
> My guess is in fact that 1E still holds the PHB sales record. Despite rumor, WOTC still hasn't said otherwise, and they still haven't said 4E sales are record-breaking.




Didn't Dancey state that a lot of those numbers were gone when WotC bought TSR?


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Shemeska said:


> We can compare anecdotes all day long about our own demographic bubbles and if 4e is or isn't doing well therein, but without hard sales figures for various books we can't draw solid conclusions at this stage.




Dude! The GIFT SET was the top 25th book of 2008 for AMAZON! This is hilarious! Is that not a hard sales figure? How is it not so? How is it not the sign of a smashing success? How does that jive with the idea of it selling like it's Fatal with a D&D label on it? I'll tell you how, not one bit.


----------



## Shroomy (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> It's kinda funny (or sad, rather)
> 
> When Mona comes and says that Pathfinder is doing awesome and that Paizo hasn't stopped gaining more customers and selling since the announcement of the PFRPG, not a single soul questions his motives, nor his veracity. It's a fact.
> 
> ...




It's about time someone made this point.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

The claim that 4e could still be a failure by trying, and failing, to compare it to 1e sales is very amusing. I'm almost prepared to take on that the comparison alone is a sign of 4e's success.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 5, 2008)

This insistence on the lack of 4e commercial success is a source of constant puzzlement for me.

Why do people need to validate their dislike of this game by declaring that it isn't selling?

There are tons of movies, books and songs that I utterly dislike and yet are resounding commercial successes. I might patronizingly state that the "unwashed masses" don't share my refined artistic tastes, but I'd never try to deny the market reality...


----------



## Mark (Nov 5, 2008)

There are some restrictions on what someone in a publicly traded company can say.  I wouldn't hold the WotCers feet too close to the fire if they don't come across as using perfectly clear language when expressing the success of their products, not that a healthy dose of skepticism shouldn't be in play when in discussions with anyone who is trying to sell something.  Besides, isn't a successful D&D still a sign of a successful industry overall?


----------



## Gundark (Nov 5, 2008)

My LGS seems to be moving the core books regularly


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 5, 2008)

Mark said:


> Besides, isn't a successful D&D still a sign of a successful industry overall?



I really think so. IIRC some time ago somone from Steve Jackson Games stated that they always rooted for a successful D&D because it acted as a gateway to other RPGs.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 5, 2008)

dajr said:
			
		

> Thats what I was responding too. That ranking would NOT have happened if it was Fatal with D&D slapped on it, imho.




4e is doing very, very well indeed, but I think you severely underestimate the brand loyalty of D&D fans. 4e isn't doing great because it's a messiah of a game, come to save us all from darkness and lead us into the light.  Or at least, not JUST because of that.

In fact, you could argue that 4e's initial sales are a result of 3e's success in cementing and expanding a D&D market, if you wanted to point fingers at causes.

4e is doing quite good. Those who protest this point are kind of sticking their heads in the sand. But...and here is a prediction you can test in about a decade....5e will do *even better*. And 6e will do even better than that. 

2e did better than 1e, which did better than OD&D, and 3e did better than 2e. 

All 4e's initial sales mean is that people are still playing or interested in D&D. This is a tremendously good thing, and it's very fortunate that WotC underestimated rather than overestimated that crowd. It means our hobby is a healthy one, and that it can grow. 

It doesn't mean 4e has won some sort of "better than sex!" contest. All my little quip was pointing out was that 4e sales doesn't tell you much very specifically about 4e aside from the fact that a lot of people bought it. A lot of people buy illegal drugs, romance novels, and mass-produced oil paintings of Jesus, too.  

I used to think that sales and cost and that whole capitalism bag were sort of a democratic process of quality or at least functional usefulness. But then I remembered that people are fundamentally insane, and that you can create supply and demand for _pardons from sins_, if you wanted. Buying 4e is probably motivated more by hope, fear, curiosity, loyalty, and other nebulous things than it is by whether or not fighters can trip at-will or per-day. Meaning that, if the rules were FATAL, but the name was D&D, it would still inspire that emotional hope/fear/curiosity/loyalty/etc. A rose by any other name would NOT smell as sweet, so to speak.

4e is selling well. This is to be expected, praised even. But try not to make the mistake of assuming 4e is selling well because it is the bestest. Sales don't tell you very much about quality. Awesome stuff goes unnoticed, and crud gets consumed because human beings are not eminently logical creatures. Sales probably tell you more about how popular the fantasy genre has become since 2000, and how well WotC's pre 4e media blitz reminded people that D&D still exists, than it does about anything that's between those splashy covers.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> 4e is doing very, very well indeed, but I think you severely underestimate the brand loyalty of D&D fans.




I think you overestimate the power of the brand name to sell ~ specific examples deleted: PS~.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> 2e did better than 1e



Are you sure about that?

I think that 2e sold worse than 1e. In the early eighties D&D sold really a lot.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 5, 2008)

> I think you overestimate the power of the brand name to sell 900 pages of ~ specific examples deleted: PS~.




Versus 900 pages of different ways to roll dice and pretend to be a prancing elf?

I mean, it was hyperbole, but let's not delude ourselves about what we're actually being sold, here, either. It's...not really a very useful thing...you can't eat it or build a bridge out of it or use it to make a house, and you can certainly pretend to be a prancing elf and roll dice around without it.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 5, 2008)

Nikosandros said:
			
		

> Are you sure about that?
> 
> I think that 2e sold worse than 1e. In the early eighties D&D sold really a lot.




You could be right, I didn't do any fact-checking on it. Even if true, though, the growth of the game has been a rising curve with a "2e hiccup" there in the middle.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> Versus 900 pages of different ways to roll dice and pretend to be a prancing elf?




There's a world of difference between just another RPG about pretending to be a prancing elf and FATAL. You're saying that the worse RPG ever made, which is filled to the brim with violence towards women and a fixation on sex in a juvenile and disturbing fashion would sell like hotcakes just because of the D&D name. It's like saying that a snuff film would hit #1 at the box office if it had the name Star Wars slapped on it. Sorry, but that dog don't hunt.

You're right that people are fundamentally insane, because you've proven that with hyperbole that goes beyond the bounds of reasonable exaggeration.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> 4e is doing very, very well indeed, but I think you severely underestimate the brand loyalty of D&D fans. 4e isn't doing great because it's a messiah of a game, come to save us all from darkness and lead us into the light.  Or at least, not JUST because of that.




No, I don't think I am. And please note, that I didn't make that assumption. What I did do is point out that I think it's silly to make the claim that Fatal with D&D on the cover would sell as well. In my mind it is an absurd claim.



Kamikaze Midget said:


> 2e did better than 1e, which did better than OD&D, and 3e did better than 2e.




This is a claim that, on the face of it, I have a hard time believing. Do you have any evidence?



Kamikaze Midget said:


> It doesn't mean 4e has won some sort of "better than sex!" contest. All my little quip was pointing out was that 4e sales doesn't tell you much very specifically about 4e aside from the fact that a lot of people bought it. A lot of people buy illegal drugs, romance novels, and mass-produced oil paintings of Jesus, too.




Note that I wasn't addressing this. What I was addressing was your claim that fatal with D&D slapped on the cover would do as well. I think you are completely and totally incorrect.



Kamikaze Midget said:


> I used to think that sales and cost and that whole capitalism bag were sort of a democratic process of quality or at least functional usefulness. But then I remembered that people are fundamentally insane, and that you can create supply and demand for _pardons from sins_, if you wanted. Buying 4e is probably motivated more by hope, fear, curiosity, loyalty, and other nebulous things than it is by whether or not fighters can trip at-will or per-day. Meaning that, if the rules were FATAL, but the name was D&D, it would still inspire that emotional hope/fear/curiosity/loyalty/etc. A rose by any other name would NOT smell as sweet, so to speak.




OK, this, what? I can't help you here. I'll just say that I'm sorry 4e's success has dredged all this up for you.



Kamikaze Midget said:


> 4e is selling well. This is to be expected, praised even. But try not to make the mistake of assuming 4e is selling well because it is the bestest. Sales don't tell you very much about quality. Awesome stuff goes unnoticed, and crud gets consumed because human beings are not eminently logical creatures. Sales probably tell you more about how popular the fantasy genre has become since 2000, and how well WotC's pre 4e media blitz reminded people that D&D still exists, than it does about anything that's between those splashy covers.




I'll just say, that I made no such claim. I, personally, think 4e is a great game. I, personally, think that it's sales reflect that. I understand, maybe not why, that you disagree, fine. I think, though, that your claim that fatal with D&D slapped on the cover would do just as well is a bit more than just hyperbole, I think it is just plain wrong.


----------



## Greg K (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Not to mention record spots on the NYT bestseller list. Ever seen other RPG's on that?
> .




Yes,
"FAST FACTS:
-- Manufactured by Wizards of the Coast Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro Inc., the third edition of the Dungeons & Dragons (D&D(R)) Player's Handbook has appeared on several top publishing lists, including the New York Times best-seller list and USA Today's Best-Selling Books List. The Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook peaked at number three on Amazon.com's Yet-To-Be Published Best-Sellers list."  SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 19, 2001


----------



## CharlesRyan (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Didn't Dancey state that a lot of those numbers were gone when WotC bought TSR?




So did Ryan.


----------



## CharlesRyan (Nov 5, 2008)

Er, the one whose _last_ name is Ryan, not _first_ name . . . .


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 5, 2008)

CharlesRyan said:


> Er, the one whose _last_ name is Ryan, not _first_ name . . . .




Don't I recall you stating in some interview back in 2003 that you (WotC) were selling more PHBs per year than during the "peak" back during AD&D 1e?


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Greg K said:


> Yes,
> "FAST FACTS:
> -- Manufactured by Wizards of the Coast Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro Inc., the third edition of the Dungeons & Dragons (D&D(R)) Player's Handbook has appeared on several top publishing lists, including the New York Times best-seller list and USA Today's Best-Selling Books List. The Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook peaked at number three on Amazon.com's Yet-To-Be Published Best-Sellers list."  SEATTLE--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Dec. 19, 2001




I fail to see how this makes 4e any less of a success... Either way, my point was not to debate if 4e was a success or not. My point was that it's odd how people distrust everything WotC says regarding 4e's success, but at the same time takes anything Mr. Mona says at face value, regarding Paizo's success. Now, just to be clear, I do not believe Mona lies or anything, I just find the extreme double-standard funny.


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

The Little Raven said:


> Don't I recall you stating in some interview back in 2003 that you (WotC) were selling more PHBs per year than during the "peak" back during AD&D 1e?




I'd love to see a direct answer to this.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

Amazon Sales ranks doesn't mean anything as it is calculated in relation to how other products do. So depending on how many other books are bought the same sales rank can means something very different.

To get real numbers you probably have to buy some Hasbro stocks and go to the shareholders' meeting.

Anyway, the real test for 4E are the first splat books and the second set of core books. It has shown that a lot of people tried the game. Now the question is how many of them stay and how many leave again.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 5, 2008)

Reading through some of the responses here, some people seem to "need" 4E to be a failure, and out of this "need" may try to interpret/rationalize data to serve the "need".

Aside from looking at numbers, look at chatter. The huge majority of D&D internet chatter is almost exclusively focused on 4E. Positive or negative, 4E is the center of attention. Its almost as if 3E doesn't exist aside from being "better than 4E" to some people.


----------



## Greg K (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> I fail to see how this makes 4e any less of a success....




I wasn't concerned with whether or not 4e is a success.  I was simply refuting the claim that 4e was the first time that an edition of DND made the NYT.


----------



## DaveMage (Nov 5, 2008)

Gundark said:


> My LGS seems to be moving the core books regularly




Doesn't that make it hard for customers to find them?


----------



## radferth (Nov 5, 2008)

Cadfan said:


> Evidence for some nebulous, future collapse of 4e: None.




Evidence for future collapse of 4e: the third law of themodynamics.  I think 4e must be viewed as failure in light of its inability to prevent the eventual heat death of the universe.  Maybe they shouldn't've nerfed wizards...


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Greg K said:


> I wasn't concerned with whether or not 4e is a success.  I simply refuting the statement that 4e was the first time that an edition of DND made the NYT.




Yeah, players handbook vs the gift set.. Not a big difference I guess.. only about 3 times as many books. But yeah, my bad, forgot 3e PHB was on it as well.



> Amazon Sales ranks doesn't mean anything as it is calculated in relation to how other products do. So depending on how many other books are bought the same sales rank can means something very different.




You should really have read the thread and links. The amazon bestseller list is based on most of 2008, from January till October, *and based on number of customer orders*. Hows that not a strong indication of awesome sales?

Or maybe you are one of those that claim that WotC bribed both Amazon.com and the New York Times to be creative with the numbers?


----------



## malraux (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> To get real numbers you probably have to buy some Hasbro stocks and go to the shareholders' meeting.




I'd be surprised if anyone at the shareholders' meeting even knew the answer to the question, and even more surprised if they answered the question.  WOTC is such a small part of HAS that it barely rates a line in the 10k.


----------



## Wisdom Penalty (Nov 5, 2008)

What gets me is not whether 4e is selling like gangbusters or not, but why any gamer would _hope_ that it's not. I just don't get that mentality. 

The numbers - what little we have - indicate that it's selling very well.  Good for everyone. Why argue them? What's the agenda behind the nay-saying?

Sign me Curious & Confused,
WP


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 5, 2008)

Wisdom Penalty said:


> What gets me is not whether 4e is selling like gangbusters or not, but why any gamer would _hope_ that it's not. I just don't get that mentality.
> 
> The numbers - what little we have - indicate that it's selling very well.  Good for everyone. Why argue them? What's the agenda behind the nay-saying?
> 
> ...




This is true. The failure of 4E is the failure of D&D and RPGs as a whole. Not the triumph of 3E.


----------



## DaveMage (Nov 5, 2008)

Wisdom Penalty said:


> What gets me is not whether 4e is selling like gangbusters or not, but why any gamer would _hope_ that it's not. I just don't get that mentality.




I can think of two possible reasons:

1) The hope that the D&D rules will be changed more to such a poster's preference in the next edition (which, would likely come sooner rather than later with poor 4E sales); and/or
2) The hope that D&D will be sold and/or licensed to another company, which would then lead back to the #1 reason.

Other than that, I can't really think of anything.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> You should really have read the thread and links. The amazon bestseller list is based on most of 2008, from January till October, *and based on number of customer orders*. Hows that not a strong indication of awesome sales?
> 
> Or maybe you are one of those that claim that WotC bribed both Amazon.com and the New York Times to be creative with the numbers?




You aren't by chance a rabid 4E fanboy?
I never disputed that 4E sells good, I just said that amazon sales rank doesn't give any indication of how many books are sold. 

Being Number 2 on the Amazon sales rank in the week/month a new Harry Potter book was published means something different than being Number 2 when the Number 1 is Business Mathematics extra complex edition.
A place in the anual bestseller list is a better indication if something sells well or not, but it still doesn't enable you to compare it with another product which was not sold at the same time.

Also if you had read all the links you would had realized that not only the anual amazon bestseller list was mentioned. My commend was mainly aimed at the trendrr graphs.



malraux said:


> I'd be surprised if anyone at the shareholders' meeting even knew the answer to the question, and even more surprised if they answered the question.  WOTC is such a small part of HAS that it barely rates a line in the 10k.




But wouldn't you as shareholder have the right to access this information?


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> But wouldn't you as shareholder have the right to access this information?



I doubt it. We're talking about very specific information here. It's not information they routinely prepare for shareholder consumption. And in order to form any basis for comparison, you'd need the 3E sales information as well. Companies are not in the habit of dredging up such information for individual shareholders. It takes time and effort that are better invested elsewhere. Shareholders don't get to make administrative decisions. That's what managers are for.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> I doubt it. We're talking about very specific information here. It's not information they routinely prepare for shareholder consumption. And in order to form any basis for comparison, you'd need the 3E sales information as well. Companies are not in the habit of dredging up such information for individual shareholders. It takes time and effort that are better invested elsewhere. Shareholders don't get to make administrative decisions. That's what managers are for.




I don't think the information about the number of books printed/sold would be that hard to prepare. Even a win/loss statistic for WotC would do it as the information is somewhere in there.
You still can't compare it to 3E but that would at least be a better indication than the amazon sales rank.

But I am just speculating so who knows.

Edit: I searched a bit and the 10-Q SEC filling of Hasbro looked promising, but sadly it doesn't list the subsidiaries separately. I also don't know the finance sector good enough so I know what report I have to look for. Is someone else active in the stock market and has an idea what to look for?


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> You aren't by chance a rabid 4E fanboy?
> I never disputed that 4E sells good, I just said that amazon sales rank doesn't give any indication of how many books are sold.
> 
> Being Number 2 on the Amazon sales rank in the week/month a new Harry Potter book was published means something different than being Number 2 when the Number 1 is Business Mathematics extra complex edition.
> A place in the anual bestseller list is a better indication if something sells well or not, but it still doesn't you enable you to compare it to another product which was not sold at the same time.




So, when your arguments suck and make no sense what so ever, throwing insults is your way out? 

Just face it, 4e is a success. Have a cookie.


----------



## Cadfan (Nov 5, 2008)

radferth said:


> Evidence for future collapse of 4e: the third law of themodynamics.  I think 4e must be viewed as failure in light of its inability to prevent the eventual heat death of the universe.  Maybe they shouldn't've nerfed wizards...



Pssh.  Wizards _increase_ entropy, if they're doing it right.  Before my last campaign session, the PCs had a specimen of localized order called, in the vernacular, a "castle."  Now, post session, there is a pile of high-entropy rubble.  The second law of thermodynamics has nothing on magical incendiaries.


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> I don't think the information about the number of books printed/sold would be that hard to prepare.



Think again. By the time the request gets down the management chain, processed and then sent back up again, and then gets vetted by legal who might require a NDA to be signed by the shareholder before the release of the information, you can have a significant expense.

And since you'd only be one shareholder, is it fair for all the other shareholders to foot the bill for this request of yours? Would you be happy paying the cost of some other shareholder making a similar request about a particular Heroscape set, just because they'd really like to know how many untis have been sold?

Shareholders do not manage day-to-day affairs of large companies. That's what you pay managers for.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Think again. By the time the request gets down the management chain, processed and then sent back up again, and then gets vetted by legal who might require a NDA to be signed by the shareholder before the release of the information, you can have a significant expense.
> 
> And since you'd only be one shareholder, is it fair for all the other shareholders to foot the bill for this request of yours? Would you be happy paying the cost of some other shareholder making a similar request about a particular Heroscape set, just because they'd really like to know how many untis have been sold?
> 
> Shareholders do not manage day-to-day affairs of large companies. That's what you pay managers for.




Ok, but as I said, you don't need this specific information. A quarterly report of WotC would be a good start. This information has to be somewhere. 
I am sure someone with a financial background would know where to look.


----------



## Yair (Nov 5, 2008)

radferth said:


> Evidence for future collapse of 4e: the third law of themodynamics.  I think 4e must be viewed as failure in light of its inability to prevent the eventual heat death of the universe.  Maybe they shouldn't've nerfed wizards...




[nitpick]The heat death of the universe would be caused by the _second_ law of thermodynamics, as the universe achieves maximum entropy. The _third_ law actually says that no system will reach zero temperature in finite time, which translates into _delaying_ the ultimate heat death indefinitely - the third law means that the universe will forever approach, but never quite reach, the heat death.

We now return you to your normal broadcasting.[/nitpick]


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> You aren't by chance a rabid 4E fanboy?
> I never disputed that 4E sells good, I just said that amazon sales rank doesn't give any indication of how many books are sold.




Funny. But back to the point, it was not the sales rank for the day. It was the listing of the top selling books for 2008 through October for Amazon. It IS proof that the gift set was the 25th most purchased book for Amazon in 2008. Purchased, most likely, by a lot of individual consumers. It does very much give 'some' indication of how many books were sold, a freaking lot of them.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> It does very much give 'some' indication of how many books were sold, a freaking lot of them.




And now compare "a freaking lot" with "a big pile of" to see how much better 4E sells compared to 3E, please.


----------



## Greg K (Nov 5, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> and that we just don't see any books on the secondary market because people simply BURNED them angrily after reading them the first time...
> 
> D&D 4 can only loose steem after people have actually read the books




While searching for 3pp 3e books, I did just see the 3 4e core books being sold together for $16 plus shipping and a 4e monster manual  being sold seperately for under $9 + shipping.  I wonder if they did not get the memo to burn their books.
;P


----------



## Greg K (Nov 5, 2008)

Just wondering.  When did the first 3e gift set get released?  And, how does that and the staggered release schedule of the 3e core books factor into comparisons?


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> I am sure someone with a financial background would know where to look.



Someone with a financial background? Hold on, I'll ask me.

I talked to me, and me doesn't think such information would be available to anyone but WotC and Hasbro management.

WotC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hasbro. For accounting purposes, they are considered part of the same entity and as such separate information likely exists only internally.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

Fifth Element said:


> Someone with a financial background? Hold on, I'll ask me.
> 
> I talked to me, and me doesn't think such information would be available to anyone but WotC and Hasbro management.
> 
> WotC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hasbro. For accounting purposes, they are considered part of the same entity and as such separate information likely exists only internally.




Too bad....
And nothing on Wikileaks either


----------



## malraux (Nov 5, 2008)

The 10k or 10q reports would be the only place something like that would possibly be mentioned, unless the company in question decides to issue a press release on that sort of thing.

But shareholders in a public corporation are generally not privy to specific sales numbers of individual items, especially in a company like HAS which has a rather large product catalog.  Releasing such information would give competitors an advantage.

Also, public corporations cannot give information like that to individual shareholders just because they call IR.  That's insider trading and highly illegal. *

*:IANAL


----------



## Gallo22 (Nov 5, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Yeah, players handbook vs the gift set.. Not a big difference I guess.. only about 3 times as many books. But yeah, my bad, forgot 3e PHB was on it as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...






Jack99 said:


> So, when your arguments suck and make no sense what so ever, throwing insults is your way out?
> 
> Just face it, 4e is a success. Have a cookie.




Why do you always have to be so nasty.  Every thread I ever see you in your rude, inconsiderate and just a plain jerk.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

malraux said:


> The 10k or 10q reports would be the only place something like that would possibly be mentioned, unless the company in question decides to issue a press release on that sort of thing.
> 
> But shareholders in a public corporation are generally not privy to specific sales numbers of individual items, especially in a company like HAS which has a rather large product catalog.  Releasing such information would give competitors an advantage.
> 
> ...




Neither the 10Q and 10K that I found lists subsidiaries separately. What they do is that they sometimes mention WotC when it impacts the finances in a big way (for example WOtC was responsible for lowering the North American profits in 2006 because they invested in online tools).
But while that might give an indication of where WotC is heading in itself its not more useful than amazon sales ranks.
And to see the most actual 10K/Q reports you need to be a member of some finance site.


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Nov 5, 2008)

I'm not much interesed in how WotC products are selling but how 3PP products are selling. Is Goodman selling more or less DCCs then 2 years ago, and same with other companies?


----------



## malraux (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> And to see the most actual 10K/Q reports you need to be a member of some finance site.




No.  Public corporations have to make sec filings available.  The IR part of the Hasbro website has the most recent 10q available for download.

And you won't find the subsidiaries broken down separately anywhere.  Well, maybe wikileaks or the like, but whoever inside the company leaked it would likely be looking at jail time.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 5, 2008)

dmccoy1693 said:


> I'm not much interesed in how WotC products are selling but how 3PP products are selling. Is Goodman selling more or less DCCs then 2 years ago, and same with other companies?




Goodman said in an interview on YouTube that they had sold more 4E DCCs so far than they had sold 3E DCCs over the past few years.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Gallo22 said:


> Why do you always have to be so nasty.  Every thread I ever see you in your rude, inconsiderate and just a plain jerk.




I have no clue who you are, so I can't say that I am sorry you feel that way. I will however state that I feel your view of me is not very nuanced, and that you must only have read very few of my posts. Normally I am quite nice, but for example, when someone calls me a rabid fanboy, I see no reason to be my usual nice self.

Cheers


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> And now compare "a freaking lot" with "a big pile of" to see how much better 4E sells compared to 3E, please.




Ha! Move goalposts much?

It's already been stated and discussed about 4e in comparison to 3e. We already know that 4e's "a freaking lot" is higher than your "big pile".


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

thecasualoblivion said:


> Goodman said in an interview on YouTube that they had sold more 4E DCCs so far than they had sold 3E DCCs over the past few years.




"A freaking lot" might be bigger than Darren's "big pile".

I guess, maybe, it isn't impossible to tell which is bigger.


----------



## Derren (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> Ha! Move goalposts much?
> 
> It's already been stated and discussed about 4e in comparison to 3e. We already know that 4e's "a freaking lot" is higher than your "big pile".




Which is not even close to being quantifiable. 500 Books more than 3E is also "higher than 3E".

So far we only know that 4E sold better than expected. And while this technically means that 4E is so far a success, we don't know what the expectations were nor do we have any other evidence which hints at how good 4E really sells.
We don't even know if WotC was talking about selling to stores or selling to customers.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Gallo22 said:


> Why do you always have to be so nasty.  Every thread I ever see you in your rude, inconsiderate and just a plain jerk.




I dunno, I think the rude and nasty started elsewhere in this thread.

I think it started with the whole fatal comparison, and got worse with the whole 'messiah' and 'better than sex' post.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> So far we only know that 4E sold better than expected. And while this technically means that 4E is so far a success, we don't know what the expectations were nor do we have any other evidence which hints at how good 4E really sells.
> We don't even know if WotC was talking about selling to stores or selling to customers.




We know it's on it's fourth print run.
We know that the initial print run sold out quicker while being more than 50% bigger than 3.5's first print run.
We also know that the NYT best-seller list is based on actual sales to customers.

All 3 things indicating that it is more successful than other recent editions.


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

Derren said:


> Which is not even close to being quantifiable. 500 Books more than 3E is also "higher than 3E".
> 
> So far we only know that 4E sold better than expected. And while this technically means that 4E is so far a success, we don't know what the expectations were nor do we have any other evidence which hints at how good 4E really sells.
> We don't even know if WotC was talking about selling to stores or selling to customers.




OK, I get that we don't have hard numbers. But really, are you saying that 500 books more than what 3E sold is only 'technically' a success? Were 3E sales so bad?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Amazon sells directly to the consumer. Being ranked 25th for 2008 is a whopping big hint that it sold well to customers. Are we reading the same thread?


----------



## Dice4Hire (Nov 5, 2008)

Gallo22 said:


> Why do you always have to be so nasty.  Every thread I ever see you in your rude, inconsiderate and just a plain jerk.




If you think so, report him to the moderators and let them deal with it.


----------



## Delta (Nov 5, 2008)

thecasualoblivion said:


> Goodman said in an interview on YouTube that they had sold more 4E DCCs so far than they had sold 3E DCCs over the past few years.




Link?


----------



## darjr (Nov 5, 2008)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ro8m68uVjpM"]YouTube - Some Good 3.5 Deals[/ame]

It's at the very end and I gotta say it isn't very clear what he said. I think he says that for 4e he already has preorders that exceed 3e for the last couple years.

I'm not sure, exactly, what he means, and it's from GenCon.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 5, 2008)

darjr said:


> I dunno, I think the rude and nasty started elsewhere in this thread.
> 
> I think it started with the whole fatal comparison, and got worse with the whole 'messiah' and 'better than sex' post.



The rude and nasty starts because, more often than not, this arguments are thinly disguised edition wars. The like/dislike of the game is (in the eyes of some) somehow validated by commercial success or lack thereof.

As I posted upthread, this is utter nonsense in my opinion. I am enjoying 4e, but not loving it. However, I have little reason to doubt that it is selling quite well indeed.

By contrast, one of my favorite games is AD&D, but I don't believe that the market for it is more than a small niche.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Nov 5, 2008)

Its time to stop when you guys start being mean to one another. 







* No horses were harmed in the making of this post


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 5, 2008)

Scott_Rouse said:


> Its time to stop when you guys start being mean to one another.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Dang WoTC foreigners.

Don't know how wess be handling dings around here.

Sad when the Rouse has to be the voice of reason instead of the poor SOB being attacked.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 6, 2008)

darjr said:


> YouTube - Some Good 3.5 Deals
> 
> It's at the very end and I gotta say it isn't very clear what he said. I think he says that for 4e he already has preorders that exceed 3e for the last couple years.
> 
> I'm not sure, exactly, what he means, and it's from GenCon.




This is what I was referring to.


----------



## tenkar (Nov 6, 2008)

Shemeska said:


> For me to see it actually selling well in my area, especially so for books beyond the core PHB/DMG/MM. At least in my area, it hasn't made a gigantic splash from when I've talked about it with a friend of mine who works at the game store I frequent, though it has managed to royally alienate just about every FR fan he and I know.
> 
> We can compare anecdotes all day long about our own demographic bubbles and if 4e is or isn't doing well therein, but without hard sales figures for various books we can't draw solid conclusions at this stage.




Well, the Amazon ranking can be equated to an indicator of successful sales.  It is far from a prefect indicator but certainly has much more weight and relevance to this discussion then personal anecdotes.  

In any case, you live in Sigil... 4e Planescape will probably sell by you, less so the Forgotten Realms


----------



## Erik Mona (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> It's kinda funny (or sad, rather)
> 
> When Mona comes and says that Pathfinder is doing awesome and that Paizo hasn't stopped gaining more customers and selling since the announcement of the PFRPG, not a single soul questions his motives, nor his veracity. It's a fact.




Dude, I think you post about me more online than I post about myself.

Maybe you should look into that?

--Erik

PS: Pathfinder is still selling well.


----------



## Erik Mona (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Now, just to be clear, I do not believe Mona lies or anything




Phew!

--Erik Mona


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 6, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> Dude, I think you post about me more online than I post about myself.
> 
> Maybe you should look into that?
> 
> ...




Well... the nature of Pathfinder itself puts you and Paizo in the center of the edition war, which I don't believe was intended, but here we are.


----------



## Imaro (Nov 6, 2008)

You know, I am curious about FR (I'm not a fan of FR, so really kinda neutral).  What I do wonder is ... did the two book decision sell better than the FRCG for 3e?  I also wonder what the ratio was as far as FRPG to FRCG for 4e.


----------



## Cadfan (Nov 6, 2008)

While I think that those who predict doom and gloom, or who insist that actual sales data is nullified by the anecdotal experience of their four friends, are execrable rumor mongers and trolls, concern or otherwise- I also think that 4e has an advantage over 3e in obtaining sales because 4e is following 3e, and is drawing upon 3e's large, solid fan base.  3e followed 2e, at a time when D&D was doing... not so well.  So, if I had solid data, I'd expect to see that 4e's initial sales run beating 3e's initial sales run quite handily.  But I'd also expect to see 3e attaining greater rates of growth across its lifespan than 4e is likely to attain.


----------



## darjr (Nov 6, 2008)

Look, this isn't an edition war for me. I love 3.5, if my group can hammer out our scheduling, I'll continue to play in a 3.5 campaign. I'm glad that Pathfinder is doing well. I've downloaded every beta (alpha?), and my FLGS has copies for sale. I continue to buy 3.5 material, yes I love the discounts.

I also love 4e, I'm in a campaign and am playing in LFR.

I'm just posting followups, observations, and commentary. Some of this is highly amusing, see my comments about the Fatal comparison. Some of it is just plain wrong, stating that the ranking for 25th most sold book on Amazon means nothing or conflating it with the hourly sales rankings.

I'm not fighting an edition war. I really just started with a congratulations for a hard job well done. A success that benefits us all.

P.S. Cadfan, I disagree with you, we'll just have to see.

Edit: I should add that it's amusing to me. Not that I'm amusing... or maybe I am. Just that I don't know if I am or not.


----------



## Wisdom Penalty (Nov 6, 2008)

DaveMage, good answer (on the "why do some folks want 4e to sell poorly" question I asked).  Those answers make sense, even if I don't like the motives behind them.

To the other point in this thread: The reason why people don't question Mona about PF's sales, and yet jump all over WotC, is the same reason why people don't care if I say I lost weight*, but plaster pics of Oprah all over the world when she says she dropped a few pounds. Indifference breeds acceptance.

That's right, Wisdom Penalty is to Pathfinder as Oprah is to Wizards of the Coast.

You heard it hear first.

G'nite -

WP



* Calm down ladies; I didn't really lose any weight.  I'm still 250+ lbs. of dead sexy.


----------



## Erik Mona (Nov 6, 2008)

Wisdom Penalty said:


> That's right, Wisdom Penalty is to Pathfinder as Oprah is to Wizards of the Coast.




Damn. I think I got that one wrong on my SATs.

--Erik


----------



## Rel (Nov 6, 2008)

That loud sound you're about to hear is me bashing some heads together if people don't start toning down the nastiness in here.  Why not say some *nice *things about each other for a change?  Here, I'll start:  Erik Mona is a sexy little man.

See?  Easy.


----------



## Erik Mona (Nov 6, 2008)

Smooch.

--Erik


----------



## Dragon Snack (Nov 6, 2008)

[Seinfeld]Not that there's anything wrong with that...[/Seinfeld]



Scott_Rouse said:


> * No horses were harmed in the making of this post



How do we know!  We have NO HARD FACTS!  



darjr said:


> ...stating that the ranking for 25th most sold book on Amazon means nothing...



Actually, since Amazon sold the core book set for less than some games stores could buy it for from their distributor (I know of one game store owner who bought his books from Amazon), I would posit that Amazon's sales for 4.0 _are_ a bit inflated...

I do think 4.0 is a success, but Amazon sales don't mean a whole lot.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 6, 2008)

Erik Mona said:


> Dude, I think you post about me more online than I post about myself.
> 
> Maybe you should look into that?
> 
> ...




It was just the easiest way to prove a point, I have nothing against you, Paizo nor your products. 

And grats on the continued sales.


----------



## CharlesRyan (Nov 6, 2008)

The Little Raven said:


> Don't I recall you stating in some interview back in 2003 that you (WotC) were selling more PHBs per year than during the "peak" back during AD&D 1e?




Not exactly. It would have been 2005, and what I was saying was that, contrary to the common perception (among gamers and nongamers) that D&D has for 20 years been a mere shadow of its early-80s fad highs, D&D was in fact about as big as it had ever been.

Comparisons are hard to make, because the TSR-era data is so sketchy, but virtually every metric we had good data on indicated that D&D had as many players then (2005) as it had ever had. And the numbers are probably up since then!

The broader point isn't a direct comparison of PHB sales. It's that we gamers shouldn't continue to think we live in the shadow of some glory days when D&D was _really_ popular. These days are even bigger!


----------



## Belen (Nov 6, 2008)

Shemeska said:


> For me to see it actually selling well in my area, especially so for books beyond the core PHB/DMG/MM. At least in my area, it hasn't made a gigantic splash from when I've talked about it with a friend of mine who works at the game store I frequent, though it has managed to royally alienate just about every FR fan he and I know.
> 
> We can compare anecdotes all day long about our own demographic bubbles and if 4e is or isn't doing well therein, but without hard sales figures for various books we can't draw solid conclusions at this stage.




Agreed.  The local FLGS had some initially great sales, but they have really slowed down.


----------



## Belen (Nov 6, 2008)

To be fair, Paizo does not sell at all through the FLGS.  I think that Paizo has made a mistake with the stores with their subscription program.  The stores have little incentive to stock it.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 6, 2008)

Belen said:


> To be fair, Paizo does not sell at all through the FLGS.  I think that Paizo has made a mistake with the stores with their subscription program.  The stores have little incentive to stock it.




Paizo is a niche product. It doesn't have the name recognition of something like D&D or World of Darkness. Its a product bought by those "in the know" and not by the average gamer. Their subscription program fits their business.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

Derren said:


> So far we only know that 4E sold better than expected.




We know more than that.

We know that at least the initial print run for 4e was 50% larger than the print-run for 3.5, which was larger than the 3e print-run by an unspecified amount. That means if 3.5 was 100,000 copies, then 4e was 150,000 copies. So, we know they printed more 4e books initially than 3.5 and 3e books.

We also know that they sold out that first print-run a week before the game launched, which required a second print-run to be ordered. That second print-run sold out within two months after the game's release, prompting them to order a third print-run.



> And while this technically means that 4E is so far a success, we don't know what the expectations were nor do we have any other evidence which hints at how good 4E really sells.




We can use precedent to determine their expectations might have been. 3e's first print run sold out in about 3-4 months (December 2000), prompting them to order their second print-run at that time. So, they might have expected a 3-4 month sell period to go through their first print-run, since that's what history showed them the market supported at one point. The fact that at the 4 month point in 4e's life cycle they were two complete print-runs ahead of that sales record speaks volumes about how well it's selling.

Pair that with the fact that the number one online direct-to-customer retailer in the world for books (Amazon) has them on their top 25 for 2008 (beating out a Stephen King novel, even), saying that we don't know if it's selling well is just denying reality.



> We don't even know if WotC was talking about selling to stores or selling to customers.




We do know that WotC is a successful business that knows far more about the publishing industry than we do, so I don't see them jumping the gun and pumping out print-runs that aren't being sold through to customers, especially in light of the fact that they directly learned that was one of the things that killed TSR (overprinting unwanted product, resulting in a huge amount of stock with no value).


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

Rel said:


> Erik Mona is a sexy little man.




I just threw up in my mouth a little.

But seriously, Erik is a class act, and I'm thrilled for him that Pathfinder is kicking ass and taking names. Him and his people took a gamble by deviating their core business away from the path of the industry giant, and that alone deserves admiration and respect, regardless of whether you like Pathfinder or not. I'm not a Pathfinder fan (though I do like the art), but I've got nothing but respect for the Paizo crew. And while I'm at it, I'll kiss the Rouse's ass, too. Not only is he a gentleman and a scholar, he's a snappy dresser with an unmatched rapier wit.

Look, I know that I've been involved in all this edition war crap as strongly as many others, but the election yesterday made me realize a few things about it. We spend too much time defining ourselves by our differences, which is what causes conflict, rather than focusing on our similarities, which is what brings us together. So, I'd like to extend the olive branch to all the anti-4e people I've clashed with, so we can get past this "my game can beat up your game" nonsense and get back to what this community is about: loving games and sharing that love with everyone else.


----------



## jgbrowning (Nov 6, 2008)

The Little Raven said:


> So, I'd like to extend the olive branch to all the anti-4e people I've clashed with, so we can get past this "my game can beat up your game" nonsense and get back to what this community is about: loving games and sharing that love with everyone else.




My game can beat up your game. It has lasers on its head.

joe "Synnibarr" b.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

jgbrowning said:


> My game can beat up your game.




My message of peace has failed. This means war, Browning!



> It has lasers on its head.




Every game deserves a hot meal.



> joe *"Synnibarr"* b.




I really did just throw up in my mouth a little.


----------



## Pramas (Nov 6, 2008)

I talk to a lot of retailers and distributor reps at trade shows and suchlike. The story I heard over and over was that the core books sold really well, but then sales on 4E dropped off a lot faster than they expected. One retailer at the Diamond/Alliance Open House in September told me he had stopped carrying 4E entirely because his customers had tried it and gone back to 3.5. Overall I have heard a lot concern about 4E splitting the market.

For me it's the third party market that's more of interest. Certainly this is not 2001, when many new companies broke in and lots of money was made in the RPG sector. I haven't talked to any other 3PP publishers that say their 4E products are going gangbusters. Green Ronin is releasing our new Character Record Folio soon and that should give me some solid data. The original d20 System Character Record Folio is our best selling product of all time. We'll see how the 4E one stacks up.


----------



## malraux (Nov 6, 2008)

Pramas said:


> I talk to a lot of retailers and distributor reps at trade shows and suchlike. The story I heard over and over was that the core books sold really well, but then sales on 4E dropped off a lot faster than they expected. One retailer at the Diamond/Alliance Open House in September told me he had stopped carrying 4E entirely because his customers had tried it and gone back to 3.5. Overall I have heard a lot concern about 4E splitting the market.




I wonder if 4e is seeing a split in distribution channels.  I'm buying all my 4e stuff from Amazon, not my LGS.*  Especially if game stores are not stocking 4e items, they aren't going to develop the customer base for the new products.

*:  At my LGS, I've looked a few times for 4e stuff.  Every time I ask, the response is always that they don't have it in stock, but can order it for me.  Unfortunately, that just means I'm gonna go order it from Amazon myself, and that I'm unlikely to stop by in the future.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 6, 2008)

Pramas said:


> I talk to a lot of retailers and distributor reps at trade shows and suchlike. The story I heard over and over was that the core books sold really well, but then sales on 4E dropped off a lot faster than they expected. One retailer at the Diamond/Alliance Open House in September told me he had stopped carrying 4E entirely because his customers had tried it and gone back to 3.5. Overall I have heard a lot concern about 4E splitting the market.
> 
> For me it's the third party market that's more of interest. Certainly this is not 2001, when many new companies broke in and lots of money was made in the RPG sector. I haven't talked to any other 3PP publishers that say their 4E products are going gangbusters. Green Ronin is releasing our new Character Record Folio soon and that should give me some solid data. The original d20 System Character Record Folio is our best selling product of all time. We'll see how the 4E one stacks up.




Well, 4E was kinda designed to split the market by means of its break from the OGL. Sure, there is the GSL but that is a license to publish supplemental material for 4E D&D itself and nothing further. It isn't the 3PP free for all the OGL was, and 4E has gone out of its way to break away from that. Since 4E disengaged from the OGL, it isn't a single market anymore.

EDIT: In Addition--

As for FLGS reports, communities tend to be self selecting. I don't live in a major metropolis, and the regular crowds at the couple of FLGSs that have come and gone in my area have usually been between 1 and 3 gaming groups. Not a large selection. Most of the RPG sales catered to these core groups, and these groups tended to follow a similar path. At my current FLGS, there are two D&D groups, and both have switched to 4E almost entirely. With this small of a cross section, adopting/not adopting 4E doesn't really mean much.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 6, 2008)

Pramas said:


> For me it's the third party market that's more of interest. Certainly this is not 2001, when many new companies broke in and lots of money was made in the RPG sector. I haven't talked to any other 3PP publishers that say their 4E products are going gangbusters. Green Ronin is releasing our new Character Record Folio soon and that should give me some solid data. The original d20 System Character Record Folio is our best selling product of all time. We'll see how the 4E one stacks up.




I doubt it will. GR has from the get-go of 4e not been supportive, nor shown any interest in supporting the game. I think many people will not be interested in a 4e product coming from you guys. I mean, why buy a 4e product from a company that seems to have next to no interest in supporting the game?

This is of course just my personal opinion, and I could be completely wrong.

Good luck with it.


----------



## DaveMage (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> GR has from the get-go of 4e not been supportive, nor shown any interest in supporting the game.




This is not true.  One of Chris' earliest 4E blogs talks about Green Ronin's intent to do Power Cards for 4E, which they were unable to do (IIRC) because of the GSL.

Here's the link - see the third entry.


----------



## Garnfellow (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> I doubt it will. GR has from the get-go of 4e not been supportive, nor shown any interest in supporting the game. I think many people will not be interested in a 4e product coming from you guys. I mean, why buy a 4e product from a company that seems to have next to no interest in supporting the game?



Green Ronin's stated problems have been more with the sucktastic GSL than 4e itself. You'll note that there are lots of other companies in the same boat. Please don't confuse anyone's aversion to a crappy license with lack of interest in a new system.



Jack99 said:


> This is of course just my personal opinion, and I could be completely wrong.



Yeah, you could be.


----------



## CaptainChaos (Nov 6, 2008)

DaveMage said:


> This is not true. One of Chris' earliest 4E blogs talks about Green Ronin's intent to do Power Cards for 4E, which they were unable to do (IIRC) because of the GSL.




Yeah, if you read his blog, you'll see that Green Ronin did seriously consider doing 4E stuff and was by no means against the new edition from the start. Chris has been posting his thoughts from time to time since the announcement of 4E two summers ago. Look at this post from January, for example:

Ex-Teenage Rebel: Some Further Thoughts

This was in the period when WotC was going to charge $5,000 for early access to 4E, which they later changed their mind about.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 6, 2008)

DaveMage said:


> This is not true.  One of Chris' earliest 4E blogs talks about Green Ronin's intent to do Power Cards for 4E, which they were unable to do (IIRC) because of the GSL.
> 
> Here's the link - see the third entry.




Yes. Maybe anti-4e was a bit too strong, and anti-GSL is more correct. The blog I was thinking about was mostly talking about 4e as being a bad game for new players (blog post nr 5 in your link). 

Fact is still, that afaik, GR was very quick to come out and say that they would not be supporting 4e in a significant way. Which results in the same as pointed out above. (EDIT: They already said in july that the Folio would most likely be the only 4e product from GR in 2008 and 2009 - Link

Don't get me wrong. I understand why GR made that decision, and I think it was the right decision for them. I think it is a pity, because I would rather have them make 4e stuff, but as is, with the crappy GSL, it's just not realistic. But my feelings of GR doesn't change that I still think that their lack  of focus on 4e products will affect the sales of the Character Record Folio. I hope I am wrong.

Cheers


----------



## The Highway Man (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records, selling extremely well, all the nay-sayers keep questioning these statements, claiming there are no hard facts.
> 
> sigh




Simple really: I believe WotC makes it a habit of lying, embellishing facts or selecting them to suit their marketing needs. Not that I blame them as a corporation for doing so, mind you. It's just that I'm done being naive about it.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

The Highway Man said:


> Simple really: I believe WotC makes it a habit of lying, embellishing facts or selecting them to suit their marketing needs. Not that I blame them as a corporation for doing so, mind you. It's just that I'm done being naive about it.




Accusations of fraud should be accompanied by actual facts to support the accusation. Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated libel.


----------



## thecasualoblivion (Nov 6, 2008)

The Little Raven said:


> Accusations of fraud should be accompanied by actual facts to support the accusation. Otherwise, it's just unsubstantiated libel.




Not to mention the whiff of wishful thinking...


----------



## Imaro (Nov 6, 2008)

I won't go so far as to call the representatives of WotC "liars", but alot of their statements ( close to, during and after the announcement of 4e)...have made me feel that the things they say should be examined and taken literally since the implied meaning, which most would probably take from their statements, may be later argued as "not exactly what they said"...also, one should not expect them to correct said statements if an implied meaning is bandied about.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

Imaro said:


> also, one should not expect them to correct said statements if an implied meaning is bandied about.




Well, they probably avoid jumping on on conversations like this because there's no point. If you're going to call someone a liar, nothing they come and "correct" is going to have an impact on you, since you made up your mind already.

If Scott or Mike or any of them responded to the Highway Man's accusations of deception, why would he believe them since he's already called them liars?


----------



## Cadfan (Nov 6, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> I doubt it will. GR has from the get-go of 4e not been supportive, nor shown any interest in supporting the game. I think many people will not be interested in a 4e product coming from you guys. I mean, why buy a 4e product from a company that seems to have next to no interest in supporting the game?
> 
> This is of course just my personal opinion, and I could be completely wrong.
> 
> Good luck with it.



I _roughly_ agree with your characterization of GR (their initial reaction wasn't really what I would have planned for them if I were their publicist), but I don't think it will matter to their sales.  They didn't commit any total gaffes, they just seemed tepid instead of excited, which is easily forgotten.  The general mass of fans doesn't know who GR is, and those who do won't remember their initial reaction to 4e.

There are a few third party people who, thanks to their behavior during the lead in to 4e, I will never, ever support.  But that mostly has to do with them displaying poor reasoning skills, a tendency to jump to conclusions, and a general bitterness- all traits that suggest negative things about their work.  I don't think GR did any of that.  If they did, it went under my radar, and I was pretty tuned in.  So if I missed it, well, most everybody probably missed it.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 6, 2008)

Belen said:


> To be fair, Paizo does not sell at all through the FLGS.  I think that Paizo has made a mistake with the stores with their subscription program.  The stores have little incentive to stock it.




?

Games Plus and Black Sun Games carry them.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Nov 6, 2008)

On the various points.

The reason some 3e supporters want to see bad sales figures for 4e is the same reason some 4e supporters want to make sure 4e is considered an amazing success, it is all part of the edition wars.

WotC has made missleading statements such as 4e was not being worked on when it was, and that the DDI would be ready when they knew it wouldn't. While they have never lied, I have found that in the last few years all their statements need to be parsed and strict literal meanings need to be read into them because more often than not the impression they give is not the same as the literal reading. 

As for the success of 4e it cannot be interpreted from initial 4e book sales alone. Hasbro expects a certain profit margin and anything below that margin is not acceptable even if it still a profit and not a loss. Look at DDM, it was still making a profit but sales were declining over a period of 2 years after its initial success and was canceled and reworked into a different product. In addition to long term success which can't be derived from 4 months of sales the intial profit margins were probably based on DDI sales as well. And when DDI sales are combined with 4e book sales for this year, those are the profit margins which Hasbro will base success or failure decisions on. So while 4e book sales could be wonderful, if DDI fails the book sales numbers may not be high enough alone to qualify 4e a success even if they are 50% bigger than 3e book sales.


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 6, 2008)

The Highway Man said:


> Simple really: I believe WotC makes it a habit of lying, embellishing facts or selecting them to suit their marketing needs. Not that I blame them as a corporation for doing so, mind you. It's just that I'm done being naive about it.



I'd say your first sentence here is pretty naive.


----------



## The Little Raven (Nov 6, 2008)

Brown Jenkin said:


> The reason some 3e supporters want to see bad sales figures for 4e is the same reason some 4e supporters want to make sure 4e is considered an amazing success, it is all part of the edition wars.




Well, personally, my reasons for wanting 4e to be an amazing success has nothing to do with edition wars and everything to do with continued support for the game specifically as well as growth for the industry and community as a whole.



> WotC has made missleading statements such as 4e was not being worked on when it was




As I recall, they said they were not working on a 4th Edition _that would require the purchase of miniatures to play_. If you have a direct source that has a direct denial of the development of a 4th edition at all, I'd like to see it.



> that the DDI would be ready when they knew it wouldn't.




Do you have a direct source for this? We knew, officially at least, a month in advance of the 4th edition launch that the DDI would not be ready, as Bill's Ampersand article spelled out.



> While they have never lied, I have found that in the last few years all their statements need to be parsed and strict literal meanings need to be read into them because more often than not the impression they give is not the same as the literal reading.




Personally, I've found people take their words and apply their own personal belief about impressions and implied meanings, usually casting it all in the most negative light possible, which is what causes all of the problems.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Nov 6, 2008)

The Highway Man said:


> Simple really: I believe WotC makes it a habit of lying, embellishing facts or selecting them to suit their marketing needs. Not that I blame them as a corporation for doing so, mind you. It's just that I'm done being naive about it.




Considering the quote you had included, it seems that you are happy to label Scott Rouse and Mike Mearls liars - and they are active members of the community here.

That's against the rules, and as I can only see this as a deliberate flouting of Rel's earlier warning, you are banned for 3 days.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 6, 2008)

Brown Jenkin said:


> *WotC has made missleading statements such as 4e was not being worked on when it was*, and that the DDI would be ready when they knew it wouldn't. While they have never lied, I have found that in the last few years all their statements need to be parsed and strict literal meanings need to be read into them because more often than not the impression they give is not the same as the literal reading.




As Cadfan hinted, this has been shot down about 1823 times during the last year. There has not been one single proof of it, besides a few people saying it again and again. If you have some proof, please post it. Repeating it will not make it any more true. Regarding the DDI, are you really serious? Every time a company fails to meet a deadline, do you really consider any previous statement regarding said deadline a misleading statement? I agree that it sucks that they have failed to make the deadline, and that it puts them in a bad light. But going as far as accusing them of making misleading statements is a bit much, no?


----------



## Coustain (Nov 7, 2008)

Sandwich said:


> .......Buying the Fourth Edition books also inspired me to start buying books of the older editions too. Not that that really means anything....




I initialy purchased the three core books, then picked up an additional PHB for the wife, I am now also buying all the 4e books released as I am the DM for our group and I completely love this edition. 

I too also started picking up the older editions, cal it OCD (Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), but I decided I wanted to get the core books for all the editions before they became so hard to find it would be impossible to get them all. (I cut my teeth on 1e and 2e, never played 3.0 or 3.5)

All I need now is a Rules Compendium and a set of 3.0 books and I am golden.


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

thecasualoblivion said:


> Goodman said in an interview on YouTube that they had sold more 4E DCCs so far than they had sold 3E DCCs over the past few years.




So I can see from the video that darjr posted that that is _not_ what he said. He did say that 4E was getting more _preorders_ than 3E did for the last couple years. 

Look, I'm sure that 4E is selling a whole lot of books. That's not in doubt, nor am I interested in arguing that.

But once again someone has danced very carefully around the "record sales" issue, and you took from it what you wanted to hear. We know that both Scott Rouse and Charles Ryan are involved in this thread, they've had a golden opportunity to say for the record, "yes/no/don't know if 4E has outsold 1E to this point in time". And they have, as always, scrupulously avoided that.

So to this time I see the number of official claims that "4E has outsold all prior editions": zero. My personal theory is that 4E has sold a lot of books, less than 1E, and I don't see any evidence to the contrary.


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Nov 7, 2008)

post deleted


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> We know that both Scott Rouse and Charles Ryan are involved in this thread, they've had a golden opportunity to say for the record, "yes/no/don't know if 4E has outsold 1E to this point in time". And they have, as always, scrupulously avoided that.





The golden opportunity you mention would make my Investor Relations Department among others very unhappy. I have "scrupulously avoided that" because I like my job and honor my NDA. 

Charles Ryan does not work for WOTC and can only speak for 4e sales for the company he works for (Esdevium the UK distributor of D&D). Charles knows his stuff and his word is good but I suspect he has a similar NDA.

So for the record I don't know how 4e has done compared to 1e

BTW as Charles eluded to in an earlier post the sales data from TSR was sketchy so even if we could openly talk sales, the 1e to 4e sales comparison could not be made.


----------



## darjr (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> So to this time I see the number of official claims that "4E has outsold all prior editions": zero. My personal theory is that 4E has sold a lot of books, less than 1E, and I don't see any evidence to the contrary.




I smell straw.

I never claimed that it sold more than 1E, nor did I claim that it looked like it did. The first time I ever saw anything like that claim was from 'Ryan'. And even he stated that it was really only a guess.


----------



## Imaro (Nov 7, 2008)

And I reiterate...




Imaro said:


> I won't go so far as to call the representatives of WotC "liars", but alot of their statements ( close to, during and after the announcement of 4e)...have made me feel that the things they say should be examined and taken literally since the implied meaning, which most would probably take from their statements, may be later argued as "not exactly what they said"...also, one should not expect them to correct said statements if an implied meaning is bandied about.


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

darjr said:


> I never claimed that it sold more than 1E, nor did I claim that it looked like it did. The first time I ever saw anything like that claim was from 'Ryan'. And even he stated that it was really only a guess.




Sure, that response wasn't directed at you. It was directed at folks such as in posts #31, 44, 58, etc., in this thread, claiming that it's been established that 4E is outselling 1E (under some metric).

Scott, thanks for the input here, it's appreciated. Noted that "for the record I don't know how 4e has done compared to 1e". Let me ask one follow-up question to totally clarify: To your knowledge, has any WOTC staffer _claimed_ that 4E has outsold 1E (i.e., "all prior editions")? Or would it be incorrect for anyone to have made such a statement?


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

CharlesRyan said:


> Not exactly. It would have been 2005, and what I was saying was that, contrary to the common perception (among gamers and nongamers) that D&D has for 20 years been a mere shadow of its early-80s fad highs, D&D was in fact about as big as it had ever been.
> 
> Comparisons are hard to make, because the TSR-era data is so sketchy, but virtually every metric we had good data on indicated that D&D had as many players then (2005) as it had ever had. And the numbers are probably up since then!
> 
> The broader point isn't a direct comparison of PHB sales. It's that we gamers shouldn't continue to think we live in the shadow of some glory days when D&D was _really_ popular. These days are even bigger!




Charles, I just noticed this response, thanks for that. As I said, I was keenly interested in your clarification there to the "So-and-so said 1E PHB's had been outsold" claim.


----------



## Scott_Rouse (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> To your knowledge, has any WOTC staffer _claimed_ that 4E has outsold 1E (i.e., "all prior editions")? Or would it be incorrect for anyone to have made such a statement?





There are still a few people who work at WOTC who were at TSR back in the day (e.g. Kim Mohan) but I kinda doubt they would know the 1e sales that well so I doubt a staffer would have made that claim.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> So I can see from the video that darjr posted that that is _not_ what he said. He did say that 4E was getting more _preorders_ than 3E did for the last couple years.
> 
> Look, I'm sure that 4E is selling a whole lot of books. That's not in doubt, nor am I interested in arguing that.
> 
> ...






> I don't usually discuss business on these forums, but I will answer enough to say, "4E is doing well for us." 4E is definitely smaller than the launch of 3.0 so many years ago, and people have a valid point in saying it's a smaller "edition launch" overall. *But compared to the trends of the last couple years, 4E has definitely caused a significant increase in sales.*
> 
> In answer to the specific callout that you quoted, "I haven't heard of any 4e third-party products selling in significant numbers", there was a period in the early days of 3.0 where ANYTHING with the d20 logo could sell great numbers. That effect has not been repeated. And many distributors and retailers who were burned by that period are being even more strict with the (limited) pool of GSL goods available. There may be some third party publishers who hoped that the GSL would be their trampoline into the sales stratosphere... but this time around it appears to require quality product, good partnerships, effective marketing, and all the other nuts-and-bolts business basics, GSL or no GSL.




From GG Link


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

Scott_Rouse said:


> There are still a few people who work at WOTC who were at TSR back in the day (e.g. Kim Mohan) but I kinda doubt they would know the 1e sales that well so I doubt a staffer would have made that claim.




Thank you, Scott, much appreciated.


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> From GG Link




Again, I have no doubt that 4E is selling a bunch of books, that's not my beef. More sales than the "last couple years" of 3.5 material, easy to believe.

But re: "breaking all sorts of records" (per post #31), you just quoted Joseph Goodman saying the following, which I count as contradicting that claim:



			
				Joseph Goodman said:
			
		

> 4E is definitely smaller than the launch of 3.0 so many years ago


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Nov 7, 2008)

First, all I will say regarding promises made before 4e fully came out, is that ze game did not remain ze same 

Ignoring the issues of sales and all that nonesense, instead I'll touch on this idea of "sales = quality."  Good lord, this is a frightening idea - scratch that, *terrifying* idea - in a world where Twilight sells well and the Wayans Brothers are still able to make movies.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> Again, I have no doubt that 4E is selling a bunch of books, that's not my beef. More sales than the "last couple years" of 3.5 material, easy to believe.
> 
> But re: "breaking all sorts of records" (per post #31), you just quoted Joseph Goodman saying the following, which I count as contradicting that claim:




It was not to prove a point. It was merely in the interest of the debate, as someone brought up GG, and I remembered this quote.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> Again, I have no doubt that 4E is selling a bunch of books, that's not my beef. More sales than the "last couple years" of 3.5 material, easy to believe.
> 
> But re: "breaking all sorts of records" (per post #31), you just quoted Joseph Goodman saying the following, which I count as contradicting that claim:



Maybe he's misinformed? It's just his gut feeling, I don't know what he did around 3E and what he does now. I don't like to assume that anyone is lying, so I would say WotC is pretty sure about their print runs for 3E, 3.5 and 4E, and I wouldn't be surprised if individual distributors aren't so much aware of it.

Though I am not sure - was he talking about the 4E core rulebooks or was he talking about the Goodman Games products launched? (I am not familiar enough with Goodman Games to know what they did during the 3E launch and what they are doing now...)




ProfessorCirno said:


> First, all I will say regarding promises made before 4e fully came out, is that ze game did not remain ze same



It did remain the same for some values of sameyness. OD&D, AD&D and D&D 3E all were the same and they were all different, too. The game still always remains the same with its dungeon exploring focus and its essential classes and races... (as opposed to Core classes and races, which did change over time)



> Ignoring the issues of sales and all that nonesense, instead I'll touch on this idea of "sales = quality."  Good lord, this is a frightening idea - scratch that, *terrifying* idea - in a world where Twilight sells well and the Wayans Brothers are still able to make movies.



You know, the trick is - there are different types of qualities. To go in the generic food analogy thing: Fast Food for example has the quality of being fast and easy to get. It might not be as healthy or as refined as other options, but if you want your food fast, you go to Burger King or McDonalds. 
A fish restaurant might make the best fish in the world, but if you want a noodle salad, it's not getting a sale from you.

So yes, "sales = quality", for the type of quality people want. (Notice: Type does not mean "degree" or "level")

D&D always had the quality and the qualities a lot of people wanted. If it ceases to do so, the value of the D&D brand will diminish, and it won't sell as good as it used to. If AD&D, D&D 3E or D&D 4E would have been bad games, D&D would no longer bring in the same amount of customers and cease being a guarantee for good sales.


----------



## vagabundo (Nov 7, 2008)

ProfessorCirno said:


> First, all I will say regarding promises made before 4e fully came out, is that ze game did not remain ze same
> 
> Ignoring the issues of sales and all that nonesense, instead I'll touch on this idea of "sales = quality."  Good lord, this is a frightening idea - scratch that, *terrifying* idea - in a world where Twilight sells well and the Wayans Brothers are still able to make movies.




Initial sales may not indicate quality, but sustained sales usually do. 

As an aside, I participate in another forum (NEOGAF), all about Video Gaming, and their reactions to the Wii and DS are eerily similar to some of the reactions to 4e here, although EnWorld is far more restrained. 

You post above sparked a resonance cascade in my brain.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Nov 7, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> You know, the trick is - there are different types of qualities. To go in the generic food analogy thing: Fast Food for example has the quality of being fast and easy to get. It might not be as healthy or as refined as other options, but if you want your food fast, you go to Burger King or McDonalds.
> A fish restaurant might make the best fish in the world, but if you want a noodle salad, it's not getting a sale from you.
> 
> So yes, "sales = quality", for the type of quality people want. (Notice: Type does not mean "degree" or "level")
> ...






vagabundo said:


> Initial sales may not indicate quality, but sustained sales usually do.
> 
> As an aside, I participate in another forum (NEOGAF), all about Video Gaming, and their reactions to the Wii and DS are eerily similar to some of the reactions to 4e here, although EnWorld is far more restrained.
> 
> You post above sparked a resonance cascade in my brain.




I want to stress that I'm not saying 4e is low quality, or comparing them to those horrifying examples I gave .  I'm simply stating that sales != quality.  I mean, Disaster Movie is an hour and change of someone taking a dump, and it still did well in the box offices.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 7, 2008)

ProfessorCirno said:


> I want to stress that I'm not saying 4e is low quality, or comparing them to those horrifying examples I gave .  I'm simply stating that sales != quality.  I mean, Disaster Movie is an hour and change of someone taking a dump, and it still did well in the box offices.




And I am saying that sales imply a certain type of quality. I don't know why Disaster Movie did well in the box offices specifically, but apparently it gave viewers something they wanted to see. 

Of course, movies and role-playing books are hard to compare. Movies provide short-time experiences, while the experience from RPGs lasts a lot longer - and this also affects sales, because people that like an RPG for a longer time will suggest it to others. 

I think that this point the really interesting sales to know (especially in the case of "customer retention") would be that of the Martial Power book or the Adventurers Vault and comparing it to their 3E and 3.5 equivalents. I suppose that's even harder then figuring out the Core Book Sales.


----------



## vagabundo (Nov 7, 2008)

ProfessorCirno said:


> I want to stress that I'm not saying 4e is low quality, or comparing them to those horrifying examples I gave .  I'm simply stating that sales != quality.  I mean, Disaster Movie is an hour and change of someone taking a dump, and it still did well in the box offices.




The reasons for good sales can be complex and good marketing can make a bad product sell for a while, but I believe sustained sales are a metric of market demand which can be certainly related to the quality of the product e.g. the Wii is selling like gangbusters and has sold more than any other console for the same launch period, even the PS2 and the reasons for it are very complex. The DS is also interesting as it wasn't doing that well until the revamp 'lite' came out, then it took off. 

Movies are a bit of a oddity as they are so short lived, they are very like traditional games and there is definably a fine art to marketing a movie. 

Things like brand, marketing, fashion, synergy can all help a bad quality product sell; but bad products don't generally continue to sell. However the reverse is certainly not true.


----------



## Wombat (Nov 7, 2008)

From what I've seen -- it is difficult to tell about sale simply because sales for all rpgs are down deeply around the San Francisco Bay Area.

So 4e isn't doing that well, but neither are any other tabletop games.


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 7, 2008)

ProfessorCirno said:


> I want to stress that I'm not saying 4e is low quality, or comparing them to those horrifying examples I gave .  I'm simply stating that sales != quality.  I mean, Disaster Movie is an hour and change of someone taking a dump, and it still did well in the box offices.



But you seem to be saying there is only one definition of "quality" for any type of product.

I infer from your post that you think Disaster Movie is a bad movie, and you would call it low-quality (I haven't seen it, so I couldn't say). But as you say, it did well at the box office. So there's probably a significant number of people who value getting cheap laughs or whatever for their $10, and who therefore consider the movie high-quality in that respect.

So your error is essentially this: You are defining "high quality" to mean "things that I like, regardless of whether others do", and you're defining "low quality" to mean "things that I don't like but others do". Silly others, liking low-quality things.

As Mustrum_Ridcully said, high sales imply *some* type of quality. There's something there that people wanted.


----------



## Delta (Nov 7, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> It was not to prove a point. It was merely in the interest of the debate, as someone brought up GG, and I remembered this quote.




That doesn't quite jibe with the way you quoted me above.  But at any rate, you can see how we're all coming up empty with the supposed "breaking all sorts of records" citations.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> That doesn't quite jibe with the way you quoted me above.  But at any rate, you can see how we're all coming up empty with the supposed "breaking all sorts of records" citations.




I wasn't aware we were looking for that. I got sucked into this mess because I find the hypocrisy of some funny. 

Regarding the quote to which I responded, it was merely your last mentioning the video, and thus Goodman Games.

However, I think that the real problem, is somewhere along the way, someone twisted this from "4e is a success = breaking all sorts of records".

Now, we have no way to compare to 1e and 2e (this has been confirmed), so what we can do is compare to 3.0 and 3.5.

As I mentioned way back, we know that 4e's first print was 50% bigger than 3.5's first print run, who again was bigger than 3.0's first print run. We know that it was sold out quicker than both, and also thus went into a second and third print faster than the two precedent editions. I guess you could argue that it is a record.

We also know, if I am not entirely wrong (maybe Scott can confirm this, if he still bothers with this dead horse), that 4e gift set got to a higher spot on the NYT best-seller list than the 3.0 (or was it 3.5?) PHB. That also could be argued to constitute as breaking a record.

Do we know if 4e is the best selling edition of all times? No. Do we know if 4e even sold better than the two previous editions? No we do not. 

However, and this might be worth talking about. Maybe WotC never expected it to make a clean sweep in the gaming world. The gaming world is very different from just 8 years ago, with the OGL, the abundance of popular d20 variants, etc out there. There is so much more competition of quality today than 8 years ago. Maybe WotC did not expect to get 95% of the old gamers, since they knew, that for the first time in history, they would have to compete against themselves, or rather against the last edition. 

Anyway, I think I have said my last piece on this subject. We will never really know. I suspect that even if 4e sales numbers were leaked, those who dislike 4e would still argue that 4e isn't a success, and that the numbers were probably fabricated. And if you think that wouldn't happen, why not believe the boss of D&D when he says that 4e has shattered WotC's projections? I mean, wouldn't that be the definition of a success for a company?


----------



## darjr (Nov 7, 2008)

Delta said:


> That doesn't quite jibe with the way you quoted me above.  But at any rate, you can see how we're all coming up empty with the supposed "breaking all sorts of records" citations.




One poster saying that was maybe "Ryan". And he clarified that he wasn't saying that. And that his guess was just a wag.

There was a strange rant about 2e outselling 1e which I think almost everyone agrees was incorrect. And his position, I think, was that the sales meant nothing because of this.

As far as I can tell the thread was not about 4e 'breaking all sorts of records' It's about how well 4e is selling. It is apparently selling really well. The gift set is the 25th most sold book on Amazon for 2008 through October.


----------



## Delta (Nov 8, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> However, I think that the real problem, is somewhere along the way, someone twisted this from "4e is a success = breaking all sorts of records".




Maybe you missed the point that I've been very carefully quoting _you_, from post #31 earlier in this thread:



Jack99 said:


> Yet when Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is *breaking all sorts of records*, selling extremely well, all the nay-sayers keep questioning these statements, claiming there are no hard facts.




As I said in my first post to this thread -- I'm skeptical. Or are you now willing to disavow the claim that "Mearls, Rouse and Slavichek all post about how 4e is breaking all sorts of records"?


----------



## darjr (Nov 8, 2008)

I missed that, maybe because he wasn't actually, you know, making the claim that it was breaking the 1e sales.

I thought you were complaining about claims of 4e selling more than 1e, but I guess not.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 8, 2008)

Delta said:


> Maybe you missed the point that I've been very carefully quoting _you_, from post #31 earlier in this thread:




No, I know that. We just disagree on what "breaking all sorts of records" means. I tried to explain it in my last post, but either my English sucks or there is something else causing interference in our communication, because I feel that you ignore every point I make.

I will try again.

Breaking all sorts of records /= (that means is not equal to) breaking all records.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 8, 2008)

To go back a little - the original question didn't require any records to be broken, but was just about the sales for 4E products.

As it stands now, we know the print runs for 4E are bigger then the one for 3.5 were (who were bigger than those for 3E). We know it exceeded WotC expectations so far.

We don't know sales for non-Core Rulebook products, and we know little about 3PP sales for GSL products. And of course we know nothing about the future sales.*

*) My speculation would be that sales for every edition follow similar patterns or trends, and thus if it initially sells well, it will continue to do so. But that's just my speculation, not fact.


----------



## jensun (Nov 8, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> We don't know sales for non-Core Rulebook products



I recal seeing something about H1 being reprinted fairly on in the process but I have no inclination to go digging up links.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Nov 8, 2008)

jensun said:


> I recal seeing something about H1 being reprinted fairly on in the process but I have no inclination to go digging up links.



As far as I know, that was mentioned in one of the Dragon columns, probably Ampersand. I'd link it but me and D&d insider are not getting along these days.


----------



## Imaro (Nov 8, 2008)

I'm starting to get the impression that "sales of 4e products" is being equated with the corebooks and first module by alot of people...We know the corebooks sold well initially, and we even know amongst complaints of poor quality the special sneak peek module H1 sold well initially...but what about all the stuff that has been released that seems to be brushed over by 4e proponents, let's see...

1. FRCG
2. FRPG
3. H2 Thunderspire Labyrinth
4. Adventurers Vault
5. Character Record Sheets
6. Dungeon Masters Screen
7. FR1 Scepter Tower of Spellgard
8. H3 Pyramid of Shadows
9. P1 King of the Trollhaunt Warrens


I might have missed some stuff, but I haven't heard anything about any of these books going into new prints, or selling all that great.  I could be wrong, but some of them are ranked pretty low on Amazon...even in comparison to other companies gaming products.

Another point for those claiming they aren't seeing any used 4e books for sale...I see them all the time on ebay and amazon...right now on amazon there are...

13 used core rules sets for sale starting around $55 
14 Used PHB's from $18 and up
12 used DMG's from $15
9 used MM's from $18

So yeah, people are selling them back.

I think something that will be interesting to watch is how the DDI affects sales of books.  Most hardcore gamers, who like 4e, will probably sign up for the DDI...however they have less incentive to buy the books once they do, since they have the compendium.  On the other hand casual gamers and those who may not be as enraptured with 4e will be very discerning about what they buy...Thus they're reduced or even non-existent purchases and the (possibly) reduced purchases of the hardcore gamers may lead to a situation where the cost of publishing books and maintaining the DDI is not made up from the sales of either product and one will have to be dropped in order to cut costs.  

I know I don't like 4e enough to subscribe to DDI at this point...yet WotC isn't really releasing anything that feels like a gotta have, for me, in the book department.  I am starting to get the feeling that material is being held back for DDI (Dragon specifically) that could have been included in the already sparse books WotC is releasing, and it makes me reluctant to invest in this edition.


----------



## Coustain (Nov 8, 2008)

Who freaking cares if 3e sold better then 4e or if 4e is better then 3e. These arguments are so damn old and tired already. If you like 3e, good for you, if you like 4e, good for you. I happen to like all editions and will play all editions with equal enthusiasm. Grow up and get off this "My (insert meaningless possession) is better then your (insert similar but newer or older meaningless possession)


----------



## Delta (Nov 8, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Breaking all sorts of records /= (that means is not equal to) breaking all records.




Perhaps the word "record" does not mean what one of us thinks it means. Can you name one or two of the "all sort of records" which have supposedly claimed to be broken by 4E?


----------



## malraux (Nov 8, 2008)

Delta said:


> Perhaps the word "record" does not mean what one of us thinks it means. Can you name one or two of the "all sort of records" which have supposedly claimed to be broken by 4E?




Size of initial print run: the 4e was larger than 3e or 3.5
Time to sell out of initial print run: 4e sold through its initial print run faster than 3e or 3.5.


----------



## darjr (Nov 8, 2008)

Sales rank doesn't mean much, as an idividual sample, cause it's calculated hourly.

the mover's and shakers list is a change of sales rank over the last 24 hours.

As of today it has "Martial Power" as #30 on the list with a sales rank of 198 up from the one a day ago of 366.

Amazon.com Movers & Shakers: The biggest gainers in Books sales rank over the past 24 hours.

Not a lot to go on, but a good indication that it isn't doing to bad.


----------



## darjr (Nov 8, 2008)

Coustain said:


> Who freaking cares if 3e sold better then 4e or if 4e is better then 3e. These arguments are so damn old and tired already. If you like 3e, good for you, if you like 4e, good for you. I happen to like all editions and will play all editions with equal enthusiasm. Grow up and get off this "My (insert meaningless possession) is better then your (insert similar but newer or older meaningless possession)



How bout you get off your high horse and stop telling people what to do?

I like both editions of the game. I'm very interested in this, I'm not sure why, but this is MY leisure time. If you can't take it then just ignore it.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 8, 2008)

Delta said:


> Perhaps the word "record" does not mean what one of us thinks it means. Can you name one or two of the "all sort of records" which have supposedly claimed to be broken by 4E?






malraux said:


> Size of initial print run: the 4e was larger than 3e or 3.5
> Time to sell out of initial print run: 4e sold through its initial print run faster than 3e or 3.5.




You could also add: Highest placement of a RPG book on the NYT best-seller list. First D&D book to make it the yearly amazon best-seller list. Best placed RPG ever on the amazon.com list. 

A record = An unsurpassed measurement.

In this case, its an unsurpassed measurement as far as we know (since we have zero numbers from 1e/2e).


----------



## garyh (Nov 8, 2008)

darjr said:


> Sales rank doesn't mean much, as an idividual sample, cause it's calculated hourly.




The hourly movers, yeah.  But the gift set is 25th on Amazon's list of sales *for the year*.  That's purely total sales, not "hot or not."  That's pretty impressive.


----------



## darjr (Nov 8, 2008)

garyh said:


> The hourly movers, yeah.  But the gift set is 25th on Amazon's list of sales *for the year*.  That's purely total sales, not "hot or not."  That's pretty impressive.




That's what I keep saying... 

Anyway, the movers and shakers are *NOT *hourly, they are based on *24 hours* of the sales rank data.

Or did I miss the joke?


----------



## Amphimir Míriel (Nov 8, 2008)

Truth Seeker said:


> *This is found*, make of it, as you will.




Well, strangely enough, it tells me that you Gringos stop buying D&D books when there´s a presidential election.


----------



## garyh (Nov 8, 2008)

darjr said:


> That's what I keep saying...
> 
> Anyway, the movers and shakers are *NOT *hourly, they are based on *24 hours* of the sales rank data.
> 
> Or did I miss the joke?




Got mixed up in the crossfire.  I thought you were disparaging the Amazon data.  Never mind me...


----------



## darjr (Nov 9, 2008)

garyh said:


> Got mixed up in the crossfire.  I thought you were disparaging the Amazon data.  Never mind me...



The more I thought about it I thought you were making a joke about how many times I repeated it.


----------



## Delta (Nov 9, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> You could also add: Highest placement of a RPG book on the NYT best-seller list. First D&D book to make it the yearly amazon best-seller list. Best placed RPG ever on the amazon.com list.
> 
> A record = An unsurpassed measurement.
> 
> In this case, its an unsurpassed measurement as far as we know (since we have zero numbers from 1e/2e).




Well there you go -- you didn't say there were claims of records "as far as we know". You would have to know 1E and 2E sales to establish it as a true record. Of which I am skeptical and seen no evidence or official claims.

Most of that stuff didn't even exist in the 1E/2E era. Can I get a link documenting the "highest placement of a RPG book on the NYT best-seller list?" And are you also qualifying that to just the 3E/4E era?


----------



## Wayside (Nov 9, 2008)

Delta said:


> Well there you go -- you didn't say there were claims of records "as far as we know". You would have to know 1E and 2E sales to establish it as a true record. Of which I am skeptical and seen no evidence or official claims.



Every record is a record "as far as we know." Or did you forget that record is a verb as well as a noun?

A record is simply the highest or lowest _recorded _measurement in one direction or another.


			
				OED said:
			
		

> d. A performance or occurrence remarkable among, or going beyond, others of the same kind; spec. the best recorded achievement in any competitive sport.



Nobody can say for certain who the fastest runner ever or the oldest person ever etc. were, and that makes no difference _at all_ as far as setting records goes.


----------



## Vorput (Nov 9, 2008)

I don't really have anything to contribute, but want to be part of this thread.

Here's a d6 that rolled low:


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 9, 2008)

Imaro said:


> I'm starting to get the impression that "sales of 4e products" is being equated with the corebooks and first module by alot of people...We know the corebooks sold well initially, and we even know amongst complaints of poor quality the special sneak peek module H1 sold well initially...but what about all the stuff that has been released that seems to be brushed over by 4e proponents, let's see...
> 
> 1. FRCG
> 2. FRPG
> ...



Hmm. That's more interesting. But I really have no idea how these types of books sold for 3E. Maybe someone else will find out.  I could see that adventures have a few more problems, since they are getting higher level. Our group is just starting H2, and I already have P1, for example. Do they come out too fast? Don't people like the adventures or the system? This is stuff that would be interesting and insightful to figure out. 




> I think something that will be interesting to watch is how the DDI affects sales of books.  Most hardcore gamers, who like 4e, will probably sign up for the DDI...however they have less incentive to buy the books once they do, since they have the compendium.  On the other hand casual gamers and those who may not be as enraptured with 4e will be very discerning about what they buy...Thus they're reduced or even non-existent purchases and the (possibly) reduced purchases of the hardcore gamers may lead to a situation where the cost of publishing books and maintaining the DDI is not made up from the sales of either product and one will have to be dropped in order to cut costs.
> 
> I know I don't like 4e enough to subscribe to DDI at this point...yet WotC isn't really releasing anything that feels like a gotta have, for me, in the book department.  I am starting to get the feeling that material is being held back for DDI (Dragon specifically) that could have been included in the already sparse books WotC is releasing, and it makes me reluctant to invest in this edition.



The most interesting question would be: How does DDI sell in the first place? Is it below or above expectations? Or just right in? Or are the expectations totally worthless since they had originally believed they would have the full package (Character Builder, Visualizer, Game Table) ready by now?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 9, 2008)

Vorput said:


> I don't really have anything to contribute, but want to be part of this thread.
> 
> Here's a d6 that rolled low:




Bad d6! Don't disappoint your owner! This is how its done:  or at least  or


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 9, 2008)

Delta said:


> Most of that stuff didn't even exist in the 1E/2E era. Can I get a link documenting the "highest placement of a RPG book on the NYT best-seller list?" And are you also qualifying that to just the 3E/4E era?




Sorry, I can't find it. New computer, and many of my old links were lost in a unfortunate transition involving my daughter, my laptop and a hammer. 

I have been looking for it for hours. I am not going to waste any more time on it. Maybe someone else can confirm or not. 

Either way, I still think there has been presented ample proof of the other records. If it is still not enough, I guess we will just have to agree that we do not see the world the same way.

Cheers


----------



## Delta (Nov 9, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Sorry, I can't find it. New computer, and many of my old links were lost in a unfortunate transition involving my daughter, my laptop and a hammer.
> 
> I have been looking for it for hours. I am not going to waste any more time on it. Maybe someone else can confirm or not.




Wow, surprise, suprise. Every time I ask for validation on this stuff it comes up empty. I remain very skeptical.


----------



## Imaro (Nov 9, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Hmm. That's more interesting. But I really have no idea how these types of books sold for 3E. Maybe someone else will find out.  I could see that adventures have a few more problems, since they are getting higher level. Our group is just starting H2, and I already have P1, for example. Do they come out too fast? Don't people like the adventures or the system? This is stuff that would be interesting and insightful to figure out.




You're probably right in that there is no way to know how the supplementary stuff stacks up...but I also think it's kinda one sided to only look at the corebooks when talking how well 4e is selling.  To add something else...I think again, the DDI will have a big impact on adventures since Dungeon is part of the offering.  What I don't want to see happen is that WotC suddenly has "justification" for reducing or even stopping production of the books since suddenly (surprise, surprise) print products aren't selling well anymore and a subscription model "really makes since business wise"....You know like the magazines



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> The most interesting question would be: How does DDI sell in the first place? Is it below or above expectations? Or just right in? Or are the expectations totally worthless since they had originally believed they would have the full package (Character Builder, Visualizer, Game Table) ready by now?




I think one major thing that's not even being considered, but should be in an overall way with WotC...is how much in the hole did Gleemax put them.  I mean we all know it cost them money...and we all know it flopped.  I think the fact that DDI was pushed into a sub format without the promised offerings might hint at the fact that 4e' blazing success may not have been enough to off set gleemax. 

The above along with their very sparse publishing schedule, as far as rule books go (since 3e proved these are your money makers), creates a picture in my mind of exactly what so many claimed was not going to happen with D&D 4e...the subscription based material and resources is being pushed and promoted over the print material.  While "optional" in the literal sense, DDI and it's components are becoming the center of D&D.  It's this fact that makes me not want to support DDI, that's not the road I want to see the hobby take (especially when everything is fully functional and they increase the price).  DDI was marketed as something to supplement the D&D  game proper...but now, I feel, it's becoming the main product for D&D and, if this is actually what WotC has planned,  I'm not happy with the direction at all.


----------



## Shemeska (Nov 9, 2008)

Imaro said:


> I think one major thing that's not even being considered, but should be in an overall way with WotC...is how much in the hole did Gleemax put them.  I mean we all know it cost them money...and we all know it flopped.  I think the fact that DDI was pushed into a sub format without the promised offerings might hint at the fact that 4e' blazing success may not have been enough to off set gleemax.




It was a major project with a year's worth of funding and after a year they had essentially nothing to show for it. The current DDI strikes me as a rushed product frantically coded at the last minute in order to put something -anything- up to say that at the end of the year, they were starting to get revenue from the investment. It was probably that or risk having the entire thing canned down the line, and the magazines and compendium were the absolute lowest hanging fruit of what was by that point supposed to be fully functional and available for the public.

I wouldn't by any means peg 4e's success (by whatever metric you're measuring that by) to Gleemax's epic failure and the overall DDI's late and lackluster performance to date. 4e sold well at least initially, and it's probably enough to make up for the digital investment since the coding was as best I can guess, done as cheaply as possible (lots of recent grads or low experience on many of the resumes for the Radiant Machine bunch, save for some of the top folks, many of whom aren't there post Gleemax, but my sampling is just public posted stuff so it might be flawed, I can't be sure).

But months after the DDI was supposed to be fully ready, over a year after they started development, we've been told not to expect everything to be ready till late 2009. If things don't fly immediately on the money front for the DDI, I don't think it'll last that long before the plug is pulled or it's scaled back in some manner.

Time will tell.


----------



## Wayside (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Sorry, I can't find it.



The issue may be that you're thinking of the Wall Street Journal's list, not the NYT's.


----------



## ki11erDM (Nov 10, 2008)

Why is it so hard to believe that with the US population growing a minimum of 70 million that a few of them might have picked up D&D?  Is that really so ludicrous?

Every single numeric that anyone has come up with shows 4e is selling really well.  Why is that so hard to believe?  Because the monkeys in your local game store don’t like it?  Or a few people are selling ‘used’ books?  It’s just laughable.  Heck I had played D&D for almost 15 years before I started going to game store.

And as to the silly comments about 1e/2e were you somehow try to prove something with utterly no evidence what so ever… you guys need to go work in politics.  At least then I could understand making clams based solely on your own perceptions.  And that is not to say that TSR didn’t sell billions of books… just that we have no way to know so you just can’t make the clam.

How in the world has this thread gone for 7-8 pages and spawned at least one other dumbmifying thread?  /sigh


----------



## CharlesRyan (Nov 10, 2008)

Delta said:


> But once again someone has danced very carefully around the "record sales" issue, and you took from it what you wanted to hear. We know that both Scott Rouse and Charles Ryan are involved in this thread, they've had a golden opportunity to say for the record, "yes/no/don't know if 4E has outsold 1E to this point in time". And they have, as always, scrupulously avoided that.
> 
> So to this time I see the number of official claims that "4E has outsold all prior editions": zero. My personal theory is that 4E has sold a lot of books, less than 1E, and I don't see any evidence to the contrary.




Delta, you are right: As far as I can see, the number of official claims that 4E has outsold all prior editions is zero. I don't recall any _unofficial_ claims that 4E has outsold all prior editions, but if there have been any such claims, I doubt they have any foundation. So we can put that one to rest.

As for any opportunity _I_ have had to compare 4E to 1E, well, there are two problems there. First of all, I hope I've been clear that I don't work at WotC anymore. I may be pretty well informed, but I don't know the numbers on 4E. Second, I've always pointed out that the 1E data is sketchy at best. So rather than "scrupulously avoiding" anything related to 1E, for years I've always clearly gone the "don't know" route in regards to sales comparisons to early editions.

Finally, why is comparison of PHB sales between 1E and 4E even being discussed? The business models are so different over that 30-year span that comparing the sales of a single title, even the PHB, is pretty meaningless.

I think your personal theory is spot on. 4E has sold a lot of books, and in its first four months has probably not outsold an indeterminate span of 1E books.


----------



## SlyFlourish (Nov 10, 2008)

CharlesRyan said:


> Finally, why is comparison of PHB sales between 1E and 4E even being discussed? The business models are so different over that 30-year span that comparing the sales of a single title, even the PHB, is pretty meaningless.




The reason it's being discussed is because some people are seeking any argument to poke 4th edition full of holes. I think some are genuinely curious about how their hobby is doing but others are seeking justification for their belief that 1e, 2e, or 3e is /better/. Sales are one possible way of doing that.

Frankly, I think we should all just get back to gaming.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 10, 2008)

Wayside said:


> The issue may be that you're thinking of the Wall Street Journal's list, not the NYT's.




Checked that too, and couldn't search the old lists (or maybe my search skill is untrained and based on my wisdom.. or something).


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Nov 10, 2008)

mshea said:


> The reason it's being discussed is because some people are seeking any argument to poke 4th edition full of holes. I think some are genuinely curious about how their hobby is doing but others are seeking justification for their belief that 1e, 2e, or 3e is /better/. Sales are one possible way of doing that.
> 
> Frankly, I think we should all just get back to gaming.




And some are hoping to show that 4e is the greatest edition of D&D ever because it has sold more books than any other edition. 

This is not just one sided, it is just one front in the edition war.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 10, 2008)

mshea said:


> The reason it's being discussed is because some people are seeking any argument to poke 4th edition full of holes. I think some are genuinely curious about how their hobby is doing but others are seeking justification for their belief that 1e, 2e, or 3e is /better/. Sales are one possible way of doing that.
> 
> Frankly, I think we should all just get back to gaming.




Well, if I had the choice between playing 3E or poking holes in 4E, the latter sounds still far more enjoyable.
[/Cheap Shot]



Mustrum "No rulebooks where poked or burned in making this post" Ridcully


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 10, 2008)

Brown Jenkin said:


> And some are hoping to show that 4e is the greatest edition of D&D ever because it has sold more books than any other edition.
> 
> This is not just one sided, it is just one front in the edition war.




Do you still call it a war when it is one-sided ambushes and attacks? I thought that was terrorism..


----------



## Darrin Drader (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Do you still call it a war when it is one-sided ambushes and attacks? I thought that was terrorism..




I thought it was called skirmishing.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Do you still call it a war when it is one-sided ambushes and attacks? I thought that was terrorism..




As long as nobody is killed or hurt, I would call it annoying. Besides: War on Terror. 'nuff said. Well, actually already too much - no need to bring politics into this... Real terror on message boards its using WTD - Weapons of Time Destruction, like posting tvtrope links.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Do you still call it a war when it is one-sided ambushes and attacks? I thought that was terrorism..



Maybe if it were one sided, but both sides here seem perfectly willing to take part.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 10, 2008)

Okay, we now have a way of comparing, at least as much as we will have until Bill stops by and decides to give us the figures 



> USA TODAY calculates a list of 300 best-selling books each week. The first 50 are published in the newspaper, and the top 150 are available online. USA TODAY's list is based on a computer analysis of retail sales nationwide last week. Included are more than 1.5 million volumes from about 4,700 independent, chain, discount and online booksellers.
> 
> Reporting stores include: Amazon.com, B. Dalton Bookseller, Barnes & Noble.com, Barnes & Noble Inc., Books-A-Million.com, Books-A-Million and Bookland, Borders Books & Music, Bookstar, Bookstop, Brentano's, Davis Kidd Booksellers (Nashville, Jackson, Memphis in Tenn.), Doubleday Book Shops, Hudson Booksellers, Joseph-Beth Booksellers (Lexington, Ky.; Cincinnati, Cleveland), Powell's Books (Portland, Ore.), Powells.com, R.J. Julia Booksellers (Madison, Conn.), Schuler Books & Music (Grand Rapids, Mich.), Target, Tattered Cover Book Store (Denver), Waldenbooks.




3.5 PHB - 2 weeks on list, peak at 57
3.5 DMG - 1 week on list, peak at 92
3.5 MM - 1 week on list, peak at 112
3.5 Gift Set - does not figure on it (was there even one? I can't recall)

3.5 Magic Item book was there for one week, peaking at 147
3.5 PHB2, 1 week, peak at 128

3.0 PHB - 3 weeks on list, peak at 45
3.0 DMG - 2 weeks on list, peak at 58
3.0 MM - 2 weeks on list, peak at 58
Gift set doesn't figure on it, if there was one

4e PHB - 4 weeks on list, peak at 47
4e DMG - 1 week on list, peak at 128
4e MM - 1 week on list, peak at 147
4e Gift Set - 2 weeks on list, peak at 57

Link to some - search for rest

Also note that AV was there one week, peaking at 109, FRPG was there 1 week, peaking at 129

That's all I could find, draw  your own conclusions.


----------



## justanobody (Nov 10, 2008)

Looks like 3.0 was the best for the available data.


----------



## Derren (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Okay, we now have a way of comparing, at least as much as we will have until Bill stops by and decides to give us the figures




So according to this 4E doesn't look as if it sold that much more than 3E....

But again, those charts only compare how much books were sold compared to the other books at that time. You still can't really compare those ranks, just make a guess based on them.


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Nov 10, 2008)

Brother ... pulling up data from the USA today, ... completely useless.  Comparing it like that would mean the following assumptions (and these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head):

The total size of the book market are identical for all time periods (which they are not).
Economic conditions for all time periods are identical (which they are not).
Harry Potter, LotR, Spiderman and others never skewed or even influenced the market.
People were passing on role playing to the next generation in identical proportions.
People's interest in fantasy vs sci-fi never waxed or waned.
I can go on and on but I think you get the point.  This is really crazy that this discussion has gone on this long.  mshea really hit the nail on the head, this is nothing but a giant edition war taking a different form and we should all just go back to gaming.

And to help bridge some kind of gap, While I will probably never consider playing 4E for myself, I can definitely see me using it to introduce my daughter to RPGs in a few years.  3E is just to complex for her she'll give up before she even gives it a try, but 4E sounds about her speed.  If this was one of the design goals of 4E, then I handily applaud WotC.


----------



## darjr (Nov 10, 2008)

The 4e *gift set* was as good as the 3.5 PHB. And almost as good as 3.0... almost makes me wish they didn't have a gift set so we could see a direct comparison.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 10, 2008)

justanobody said:


> Looks like 3.0 was the best for the available data.




Sure, if you ignore the 4e gift set, which seems to be like half of 4e sales.


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 10, 2008)

> I can go on and on but I think you get the point. This is really crazy that this discussion has gone on this long. mshea really hit the nail on the head, this is nothing but a giant edition war taking a different form and we should all just go back to gaming.




Aye, it is. And I am out now.

Cheers


----------



## darjr (Nov 10, 2008)

Jack99 said:


> Sure, if you ignore the 4e gift set, which seems to be like half of 4e sales.




This.

And, again, I'm not fighting an edition war.

I'm interested in the health of the hobby and cutting through all the smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Delta (Nov 10, 2008)

CharlesRyan said:


> Delta, you are right: As far as I can see, the number of official claims that 4E has outsold all prior editions is zero. I don't recall any _unofficial_ claims that 4E has outsold all prior editions, but if there have been any such claims, I doubt they have any foundation. So we can put that one to rest.
> 
> As for any opportunity _I_ have had to compare 4E to 1E, well, there are two problems there. First of all, I hope I've been clear that I don't work at WotC anymore. I may be pretty well informed, but I don't know the numbers on 4E. Second, I've always pointed out that the 1E data is sketchy at best. So rather than "scrupulously avoiding" anything related to 1E, for years I've always clearly gone the "don't know" route in regards to sales comparisons to early editions.
> 
> ...




Charles, thanks for the input. It's quite appreciated.


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Nov 10, 2008)

The way I see the Amazon sales ranking is that all those sales through Amazon means that FLGSs are not getting those sales.  Since Amazon sells them at such a giant discount, WotC makes less of each sale, whoever distributes between WotC and amazon make less off each sale.  

So the way I see it, high sales figures for Amazon is bad for the industry as a whole.


----------



## Fifth Element (Nov 10, 2008)

dmccoy1693 said:


> Since Amazon sells them at such a giant discount, WotC makes less of each sale, whoever distributes between WotC and amazon make less off each sale.



I don't think you quite understand how the supply chain works. A retailer's sale price has no effect on how much they pay for the inventory in the first place.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 11, 2008)

dmccoy1693 said:


> Brother ... pulling up data from the USA today, ... completely useless.  Comparing it like that would mean the following assumptions (and these are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head):
> 
> The total size of the book market are identical for all time periods (which they are not).
> Economic conditions for all time periods are identical (which they are not).
> ...




Hmm. I can just conclude that we can't compare at all, right? Because there is no list that will give us all these informations and make an absolutely correct and fair comparison. 



> And to help bridge some kind of gap, While I will probably never consider playing 4E for myself, I can definitely see me using it to introduce my daughter to RPGs in a few years. 3E is just to complex for her she'll give up before she even gives it a try, but 4E sounds about her speed. If this was one of the design goals of 4E, then I handily applaud WotC.



I think that was definitely one of the design goals. Well, not your daughter specifically (I think), but...


----------



## rounser (Nov 11, 2008)

> Do you still call it a war when it is one-sided ambushes and attacks? I thought that was terrorism..



I disagree.  When conducted on opposing soldiers, that sounds more like guerilla warfare, the kind of thing conducted by real world *warlords*.  

(No relation to the entirely-inappropriate-for-the-core 4E class of the same name which ridiculously attempts to redefine the currently-in-use-in-the-headlines term, nevermind the absurdity of a first level warlord, or of Conanesque heroes taking orders from some upstart who somehow doesn't receive a sword in the belly in the second round from allies appalled at his hubris, as he richly deserves to.)


----------



## Maggan (Nov 11, 2008)

dmccoy1693 said:


> Brother ... pulling up data from the USA today, ... completely useless.




I think it is commendable that he actually went and did some research. I think it is a fresh approach to try to supply other data points, and find it interesting when this is added to the debate.

What relevance it has, is as always up to the individual to decide.

/Magnus


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Nov 11, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Hmm. I can just conclude that we can't compare at all, right? Because there is no list that will give us all these informations and make an absolutely correct and fair comparison.




Exactly my point.


----------



## Eridanis (Nov 11, 2008)

Real-world political metaphors aren't necesary for this discussion. Back on topic, please.


----------



## Wisdom Penalty (Nov 12, 2008)

darjr said:
			
		

> I'm interested in the health of the hobby and cutting through all the smoke and mirrors.




You picked the wrong thread for that. 

WP

P.S. Eridanis' sig makes me giggle, and I don't know why.

P.P.S. Anyone have any evidence of someone actually changing their opinion with respect to 4e sales? Seems to me the folks who say it's not selling never change their tune, and the folks who say it is likewise remain steadfast. 

P.P.P.S. The correlation between those who dislike 4e and those who say it is not selling well is 97.2%. Ditto for the opposite side.

P.P.P.P.S. Coincidence?


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 12, 2008)




----------

