# How big's the RPG market?



## TerraDave

Most TRPG sales through game stores are a relatively small number of books and box sets. 3 books especially. 

A fraction of the volume on the board and collectible side (which seems to be getting frothy). And of course the costs are far lower then movies or video games.


----------



## lyle.spade

Interesting. Considering how sorry most Hollywood movies are, I bet that much of what folks are making up around tables with friends is of better quality. I'll take our little share along with a good story, thank you.


----------



## SpiralBound

These charts are informative, but only tell part of the story.  For consumers, they are as detailed as they need to be.  If one is a prospective solo producer of a hobby game though, these pie charts are missing one important piece of information - how "open" are those market segments?  For example, the "Collectible game" category is the biggest, so it's tempting to think it is a great category to design for.  However, how much of that 52.5% is eaten up by MtG?  Roleplaying games are doubly dismal as they are the smallest segment, and once you rule out the top 3-5 RPGs there isn't much left of that 2.9%.  Despite being smaller markets than Collectible games, the card & dice games, and boardgames segments may be more enticing markets for aspiring game designers due to them having more room for new games to get noticed.  The term "Hobby Games" is especially apt as it not only refers to the players of such games, but also the majority of the producers as well.


----------



## Gareman

So...

1. ICV2 data is considered highly suspect.

2. It's all the game trade has to go on, so it's generally accepted. Nobody else is collecting data (publicly). It "feels" right.

3. The consensus, because nobody knows anything in the game trade for sure, is well over half of RPG sales happen online, mostly Amazon. When Wizards of the Coast allows Amazon to sell the Player's Handbook below distribution costs, well duh. It hurts new player acquisition as the FLGS is the acknowledged marketing arm of the game trade. 

4.My guess based on my store sales (and talking with others) is D&D is probably 70% of these sales. My guess is the top 5 RPGs account for 90% of sales. Have I mentioned this is a guess?


----------



## Nikosandros

Is ICV2 able to estimate sales through non-hobby channels, like Amazon? I would imagine that a lot of D&D sales are of that type.


----------



## Cam Banks

One thing that HAS been proven out based on information collected from a lot of publishers is that there are diminishing returns on supplements and sourcebooks compared to core books or core sets. Much of that can be intuited from the target audience, too - books that are only useful to GMs (like adventures, etc) aren't going to be bought by all of the players. White Wolf struck a huge chord with gamers because their splat books were useable by everyone. That's why that model has stuck around for so long.

Cheers,
Cam


----------



## Gareman

Their methodology is asking publishers what their sales are. The vast, vast majority are private, so they can give ICV2 a number, or not, or something aspirational. I mean, it's better than nothing, but there's not some huge index where data is reliably compiled.


----------



## Ghost2020

Book prices have also kept jumping up as well, that's a factor too. Maybe units purchased vs dollar amount? Probably not as easy to measure?


----------



## JeffB

It's tiny because RPGs are work and take lots of free time. Especially heavy systems like PF. 5E is still too heavy for most people who are not already D&D fans. FFG Star Wars is not as heavy as it looks, but the core products are intimidating. Luckily it has the marketing power of Star Wars.

The last thing most people (who are not really gamers) think of when they want to have a fun game to pick up and play whenever time allows, is shelling out $70 to $150 dollars on 300 plus page rulebooks. We don't bat an eyelash. But we are not those people anymore. If I had to pick up a 325 page players handbook to play in 1977, I would never have started. I'm sure there was less word count in ALL the LBBs and Holmes, and probably Moldvay too.

And having a $20 box game that is pretty easy to pick up is great,  but then hitting them with the aforementioned encyclopedias of rules and/or adventure books just to continue on is an instant turn-off. Just pick up your phone or turn on your xbox and play whatever, or grab a board game with high replay value and get right to the fun. No volumes of rules, no needing to coordinate 5 people's schedules and find a place to play, no need to pick up an additional $50 adventure path because you don't have time to make things up/do math homework assignments.

During the NEXT playtest, Mearls said something to the effect of- D&D was no longer easy to just pick up on the spur of the moment and play a game whenever,  and they want to change that. They have not done that. The game is still heavy, and their product model is focused on big adventure books that are not for new or casual DMs or people who just want to play a quick 2 hour game of D&D and feel like they accomplished something.

Until all that changes, and the rpg business models of the last 35 years changes, fans and the RPG industry  will need to be happy with the small profits and teeny weeny niche of even the best selling games.


----------



## LordEntrails

Thanks for putting this together. It does put a good perspective on things.

Our hobby is a tiny business, people often forget that and express their ignorance in many ways. (Expectations of new content, support levels, importance, etc).


----------



## SolidPlatonic

Cam Banks said:


> One thing that HAS been proven out based on information collected from a lot of publishers is that there are diminishing returns on supplements and sourcebooks compared to core books or core sets. Much of that can be intuited from the target audience, too - books that are only useful to GMs (like adventures, etc) aren't going to be bought by all of the players. White Wolf struck a huge chord with gamers because their splat books were useable by everyone. That's why that model has stuck around for so long.
> 
> Cheers,
> Cam




I think that's why many of the 5e books (other than adventures, of course) have a dual DM/Player benefit.  Volo's Guide, Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide, and now Xanathar's Guide to Everything all have content for everyone at the table.


----------



## Andres Villaseca

If $35M is the size of the market, what 7th Sea collected through KS is even more impressive


----------



## Morrus

Andres Villaseca said:


> If $35M is the size of the market, what 7th Sea collected through KS is even more impressive




There's no version of 7th Sea's achievement that is not impressive!


----------



## Paul3

JeffB said:


> During the NEXT playtest, Mearls said something to the effect of- D&D was no longer easy to just pick up on the spur of the moment and play a game whenever,  and they want to change that. They have not done that. The game is still heavy, and their product model is focused on big adventure books that are not for new or casual DMs or people who just want to play a quick 2 hour game of D&D and feel like they accomplished something.




As someone who has done just that, with 12 year olds no less, I couldn't disagree more. It is this accessibility (relative to PF or 4e) that has brought many back to the game.  There is more depth if you want to get into it, but you can grab the basic rules with a rudimentary understanding of RPGs, and be off to the races. 

The relatively small numbers are simply the nature of RPGs in general. There isn't a whole lot that RPG publishers can do to change what they are.  The product model is always going to have constraints in that one person can purchase the rules and that might be it for purchases. How many groups have players that invest practically nothing financially in the game? How many hours can players play a game without purchasing anything? It is just the nature of the beast. 

Collectible games more or less require constant purchases. They aren't marketing any better. It is just the nature of the game. Compared to board games, RPGs are in an interesting position in that I can sit down and play a game of Dominion in 45 minutes, which works for many lifestyles. RPGs, by their nature, require what....3-4 hour sessions, which is great for those that are into them, but bad for pulling in the casual player.  In other words, what makes them awesome fun is also what limits their audience.  You are simply appealing to a smaller group of potential customers, but with arguably a much greater intensity. 

We just need to accept the limitations of the medium. It isn't because RPG developers are dropping the ball.


----------



## Lord Mhoram

Not that this is important, but does anyone else find it amusing that in the last pie chart, video games is colored yellow - so it looks like Pac Man eating the other two segments in that graph?


----------



## JeffB

Paul3 said:


> As someone who has done just that, with 12 year olds no less, I couldn't disagree more. It is this accessibility (relative to PF or 4e) that has brought many back to the game.





And my experience, running games for a handful of recent HS grads since they were 10yo.is the opposite. They want nothing to do with buying the books, learning the system, and have gravitated to the simplest rules systems over the years even as they have matured. They cannot be bothered with 5e and a whole lot of other games. They want to sit down and get through a fun adventure in  4 hour session. Not get through a couple combats and look up spell descriptions. Frankly, so do I. They would rather watch a movie, play a video game, etc. than deal with complexities. Frankly, so would I. Wait til those 12 year olds get into their later teen years and early adulthood and competition for their fun time goes drastically up.

The limited nature of RPGs is based on many factors, but one giant limitation is because of the Industry business model since the late 70s/early 80s. It now feeds off itself and its core group. It is "its nature" because the Industry made it that way.


----------



## MNblockhead

I think games like No Thank You Evil (NTYE) and Hero Kids could help TTRPGs break through to the general family games market. 

NTYE is a particularly good example in that it comes in an attractive box, with attractive books, cards, and aids. An adult that has at least played more involved board games is not going to be intimidated by the rules and can read through them and be ready to run a game in under an hour.  The add-on purchase of the adventure building cards increases playability without having to hunt and pay for lots of adventures or spend lots of time building your own.  After playing several time through my 7 year old was able to run me through an adventure using the adventure-builder card set. The only thing that I don't like about NTYE is the name. But it may help make the game more palatable to highly religious families. If the game was a bit less expensive I would be buying it as birthday gifts when my son is invited to his friends birthday parties. 

Hero Kids is similarly easy and their pdfs serve as both an adventure and a crafting activity. You can cut out and color the paper minis, and print out battlemaps. Even more so than NTYE, aver a couple games, my kids (6 and 9 at the time) were creating their own adventures and running the rest of the family through them (the meat-grinder fun houses that kids come up with are hilarious). Hero Kids should do a kickstarter for a box set for about USD 20-25 that contains a printed rule book, some 2D plastic minis for PCs and monsters, some bases for the minis, so reusable maptiles (like those in their Minotaur's maze PDF adventure), some six-side dice, and an adventure book with perforated pages that you can pull out and copy to make more monsters/characters. 

If you can make a box set, kid-friendly TTRPG, with some toy-like features (cards, flat plastic minis, paper battlemap titles) that sells for $19.99 and get it into Target, Games by James, Walmart, and other retailers, I think it would do well.  

Kids that grow up playing and making adventures from early grade school, will naturally gravitate to games like D&D 5e and even more rules-heavy games when they are older. You just need to get over that intimidation hurdle that most TTRPGs present.


----------



## ChapolimX

> the RPG market is a tiny niche of the Hobby Games market, which is a tiny niche of the global entertainment market




So we can say, backed by statistics, we are the coolest kids in town? 
Plus, since the mainstream market of video games draw a lot of inspiration from tabletop RPG, we can say we are trendy too?


----------



## choam10191

> There is definitely a tabletop boom going on right now, powered by a number of factors ranging from Kickstarter, *to the introduction of US West Coast media*, and more.




What does that mean, exactly? Do you always speak so elliptically in an article intended to be informative?


----------



## HawaiiSteveO

very interesting, always curious about this. More than I would have guessed - even if broad strokes and not down the exact $.


----------



## doctorbadwolf

Ghost2020 said:


> Book prices have also kept jumping up as well, that's a factor too. Maybe units purchased vs dollar amount? Probably not as easy to measure?




I also wonder how much retailers are counting secondary stuff as part of the rpg sales portion of the pie.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Morrus said:


> Pretty tiny, is the answer. As of 2016/2017 it's about $35m in size, according to ICv2.



 That's like double the guestimated size Dancey quoted c2007, though.  Something like a 6% growth rate.  Not too shabby, in perspective.

Of course, still tiny in the broader context.



Cam Banks said:


> One thing that HAS been proven out based on information collected from a lot of publishers is that there are diminishing returns on supplements and sourcebooks compared to core books or core sets. Much of that can be intuited from the target audience, too - books that are only useful to GMs (like adventures, etc) aren't going to be bought by all of the players. White Wolf struck a huge chord with gamers because their splat books were useable by everyone. That's why that model has stuck around for so long.



 Interesting that 5e is being so successful bucking that trend...

...and that PF is continuing to be successful riding it.  

(yeah, just 'interesting' I have no conclusion whatsoever)



Paul3 said:


> As someone who has done just that, with 12 year olds no less, I couldn't disagree more. It is this accessibility (relative to PF or 4e) that has brought many *back* to the game.  There is more depth if you want to get into it, but you can grab the basic rules with a rudimentary understanding of RPGs, and be off to the races.



 The key word in there, is 'back.'  5e is very accessible to returning D&Ders from the TSR era, and to continuing fans, of course.  

I've run many intro games over the decades, including with quite young players.  D&D has never been that easy for anyone to pick up, it is a complex, 'heavy' game, and 5e is no exception.  The closest thing to an exception was 4e, which was surprisingly easy for new players to pick up - _and surprising difficult for returning ones_.  5e at least fixed that issue.
The really decisive factor, IMHO, in getting new players into the game, is having experienced DMs running great games for them (and an experience player or few in the group doesn't hurt, either). And, accessibility to long-time & returning players should be helping with that - it certainly looks that way at my FLGS, where I'm not the oldest guy in the shop as often anymore...




doctorbadwolf said:


> I also wonder how much retailers are counting secondary stuff as part of the rpg sales portion of the pie.



 Like, minis, dice &c?  I'm sure it must be counted, it'd be silly not to...


----------



## doctorbadwolf

As I'm sure you're aware, _people_ are pretty silly. Even smart, reasonable, people. 

And like, heroclix and the like, IME, are counted by retailers as board game or some other category, even though a large portion of purchasers use them as ttrpg minis. Same deal with war game stuff. Most ppl I know who buy terrain don't play war games at all.


----------



## Morrus

choam10191 said:


> What does that mean, exactly?




It means that outfits like Geek & Sundry and shows like Tabletop have helped grow the industry. 



> Do you always speak so elliptically in an article intended to be informative?




You charmer, you. I wuvs you!


----------



## Tony Vargas

doctorbadwolf said:


> And like, heroclix and the like, IME, are counted by retailers as board game or some other category, even though a large portion of purchasers use them as ttrpg minis. Same deal with war game stuff. Most ppl I know who buy terrain don't play war games at all.



 I've seen the odd heroclix mini at a table (the base is inconvenient), there's some crossover, I'm sure.  OTOH, serious minis, like Warhammer stuff, yeah, an RPGer might buy one now and then, but the Warhammer players buy tons.  Literally 2000lbs at a time wouldn't surprise me....


----------



## werecorpse

JeffB said:


> It's tiny because RPGs are work and take lots of free time. Especially heavy systems like PF. 5E is still too heavy for most people who are not already D&D fans. FFG Star Wars is not as heavy as it looks, but the core products are intimidating. Luckily it has the marketing power of Star Wars.
> 
> The last thing most people (who are not really gamers) think of when they want to have a fun game to pick up and play whenever time allows, is shelling out $70 to $150 dollars on 300 plus page rulebooks. We don't bat an eyelash. But we are not those people anymore. If I had to pick up a 325 page players handbook to play in 1977, I would never have started. I'm sure there was less word count in ALL the LBBs and Holmes, and probably Moldvay too.
> 
> And having a $20 box game that is pretty easy to pick up is great,  but then hitting them with the aforementioned encyclopedias of rules and/or adventure books just to continue on is an instant turn-off. Just pick up your phone or turn on your xbox and play whatever, or grab a board game with high replay value and get right to the fun. No volumes of rules, no needing to coordinate 5 people's schedules and find a place to play, no need to pick up an additional $50 adventure path because you don't have time to make things up/do math homework assignments.
> 
> During the NEXT playtest, Mearls said something to the effect of- D&D was no longer easy to just pick up on the spur of the moment and play a game whenever,  and they want to change that. They have not done that. The game is still heavy, and their product model is focused on big adventure books that are not for new or casual DMs or people who just want to play a quick 2 hour game of D&D and feel like they accomplished something.
> 
> Until all that changes, and the rpg business models of the last 35 years changes, fans and the RPG industry  will need to be happy with the small profits and teeny weeny niche of even the best selling games.




Interesting perspective but in the main RPGs aren't quick 2 hour games. They don't scratch that itch and shouldn't try IMO. 

Shortly after I was introduced to the game in 79 I got the AD&D Set of three books. The basic set was a taste but it didn't satisfy me. They were at least as dense and arcane as the current 5e books. In my high school about 3-4% of the kids played and maybe half that played regularly. Less kept playing after high school. I know it's anecdotal but I doubt that's changed. For many it's not their thing.

For me, while board games are kinda fun and I'll play them to be social, saying play a quick high replay value boardgame instead of an rpg is like saying I should read a magazine rather than a good novel. I mean it may be easier but it's not the same thing. Just because reality TV is enourmously popular doesn't mean all TV should be like reality TV etc (please no!). 

i don't agree that it's because other stuff is easy to learn/play etc. I tried playing some of those Xbox or play station games with my kids but I can't master the controls to the level needed to join them. I just get killed in COD. My kids spend hours playing various computer games and frequently are playing online games. I agree that once mastered the electronic games are easier to play a quick half hour game at the convenience of the consumer, but the players of these games are quite prepared to spend hours learning their craft, and they aren't cheap.

RPGs take time to play, novels take time to read, television series take time to watch but that's ok. Maybe one will eventually be able to join a pick up online game for a quick hour of roleplaying like my kids play overwatch or dota 2 but I doubt it.


----------



## Adam Jury

Unless something has changed none of ICv2's numbers include Kickstarter, so factor that into any opinions based on their information.


----------



## Morrus

Adam Jury said:


> Unless something has changed none of ICv2's numbers include Kickstarter, so factor that into any opinions based on their information.




It includes Kickstarter.

"The biggest change in our methodology this year was to add Kickstarter sales (adjusted to eliminate sales outside the U.S. and Canada) to our estimates of total market size, and as the numbers were significant for 2014 as well, we revised our 2014 estimates in two categories:  we now estimate that hobby board games in 2014 were around $160 million (adding $35 million for Kickstarter sales), and that card and dice games were around $60 million (adding $5 million for Kickstarter sales)."

https://icv2.com/articles/news/view/35150/hobby-games-market-nearly-1-2-billion


----------



## Adam Jury

Ah. At this link <http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1984-Top-5-RPGs-Compiled-Charts-2008-Present#.WV7G_NMrLK1> there are two bullet points about Kickstarter that aren't next to each other so it's easy to miss the second one after skimming the first.


----------



## Hussar

Perhaps the bigger takeaway here is just how much TTRPG's have grown since the release of 5e.  There were ballpark estimates of the TTRPG market being about 30 million in the 3e years, and a big drop off in the 4e years, particularly when WotC stopped producing new books (one number I heard tossed around was about 15 million).  If that's true, then we've tripled in size since the 4e days and still made pretty impressive gains from the 3e heydays.  Going from 30-35 million is a pretty darn big jump, and, let's face it, most of that is from 5e.

This is pretty good news, AFAIC.  If we can continue to grow about 7% per year, that's incredibly healthy.


----------



## Joseph Nardo

One billion for the global boardgame market?...where did this data come from? CNN?....try this...[FONT=&quot]Board games are returning as a mainstream entertainment among families, kids, and even child-less millennials looking for a new way to socialize with friends.[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The board game boom has not only led to the creation of new games but also to cafes and bars focused on gaming.
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Global sales of games and puzzles have grown from $9.3 billion in 2013 to $9.6 billion in 2016, according to Euromonitor International, with expected year-on-year growth of more than 1 percent this year.[/FONT]


----------



## Morrus

Joseph Nardo said:


> One billion for the global boardgame market?




Not global board game market. US/Canada hobby games market. Hobby games and boardgames are not synonyms. Monopoly is a boardgame but not a hobby game.



> ...whereCOLOR did this data come from? CNN?




Links to sources are in the article. 



> Global sales of games and puzzles have grown from $9.3 billion in 2013 to $9.6 billion in 2016, according to Euromonitor International, with expected year-on-year growth of more than 1 percent this year.




We’re not discussing global sales of games and puzzles. We’re discussing the North American hobby game market. Entirely different thing.


----------



## Loren the GM

Joseph Nardo said:


> One billion for the global boardgame market?...where did this data come from? CNN?....try this...[FONT=&amp]Board games are returning as a mainstream entertainment among families, kids, and even child-less millennials looking for a new way to socialize with friends.[/FONT][FONT=&amp]The board game boom has not only led to the creation of new games but also to cafes and bars focused on gaming.
> [/FONT]
> [FONT=&amp]Global sales of games and puzzles have grown from $9.3 billion in 2013 to $9.6 billion in 2016, according to Euromonitor International, with expected year-on-year growth of more than 1 percent this year.[/FONT]




The article states (as does the graph) that these figures are US and Canada only.


----------



## Hussar

Yeah, I imagine that you can massage the numbers a number of different ways depending on what you include and exclude.  I mean, puzzles, I imagine, are a pretty big thing world wide.  I know I certainly see them everywhere.  

So, yeah, it does pay to pay attention to the fine print.


----------



## Mercurius

Lord Mhoram said:


> Not that this is important, but does anyone else find it amusing that in the last pie chart, video games is colored yellow - so it looks like Pac Man eating the other two segments in that graph?




I noticed that too, and am bummed out that you posted it before I got a chance .


----------



## Mercurius

Interesting data. To me this is an awful hybrid of Idiocracy and Sturgeon's Law writ large: People prefer easy, instant gratification entertainment. Going to the movies or playing a video game (or most video games) requires little to no imagination and creativity.

It also goes back to the idea of D&D as IP that is marketable in different domains. Wasn't Mearls talking big about diversifying D&D into other media forms? I know there's a movie coming out at some point, but it just begs for a Netflix series. What about collectible games? (What are those, anyways, aside from cards, which are a separate category?).

It would be interesting to see these charts made for the European market. I imagine that miniatures would have an even larger share. If we moved to Asia, I'm guessing hobby games would be even more dwarfed by video games and film.


----------



## Jhaelen

Gives some nice perspective, but I'd be really interested in seeing the corresponding pie charts for Europe now.


----------



## Hussar

Mercurius said:


> Interesting data. To me this is an awful hybrid of Idiocracy and Sturgeon's Law writ large: People prefer easy, instant gratification entertainment. Going to the movies or playing a video game (or most video games) requires little to no imagination and creativity.
> /snip




I'm not sure I'd blame people too much for that though.  Running a game is not easy and it's a HUGE time sink.  I can totally understand why someone isn't interested in it.  Never minding that trying to organize a group on a regular basis can be a big nightmare as well.  

There's a bunch of pretty big hurdles that you need to jump in order to have a good gaming group that routinely produces fun sessions.  Really, it's no different than restaurants.  Sure, there's all sorts of fantastic restaurants serving wonderful food out there, but, y'know what?  McDonalds fits the bill.  Never minding that going to a restaurant is essentially just consuming other people's work.  It's not like i have to do any work to sit down in a restaurant.  But, do I prefer easy, instant gratification just because I haven't learned how to be a sushi chef?  Not really.  I'm just not interested in learning how to be a sushi chef.

It's easy to pooh pooh going to the movies or playing a video game, but, let's be honest here, both are pretty fun things to do.  People aren't wrong for preferring them.


----------



## Aldarc

Lord Mhoram said:


> Not that this is important, but does anyone else find it amusing that in the last pie chart, video games is colored yellow - so it looks like Pac Man eating the other two segments in that graph?



Now what has been seen, can never be unseen.


----------



## Maelish

*Individual miniatures or miniatures games?*



Morrus said:


> Pretty tiny, is the answer. As of 2016/2017 it's about $35m in size, according to ICv2. That's of a Hobby Games market currently worth just over a billion dollars.
> 
> The RPG segment is 2.9% of the overall Hobby Games market, which includes boardgames, miniatures, hobby card games, and collectible games.





*@Morrus*, 

In regards to Miniatures, does this refer to individual miniature sales from manufacturers _or_ miniatures games?


----------



## Morrus

Maelish said:


> *@Morrus*,
> 
> In regards to Miniatures, does this refer to individual miniature sales from manufacturers _or_ miniatures games?




ICv2 says it's "non-collectible miniatures lines (hobby channel)."

The top 5 in Fall 2016 (the latest stats) were:

Star Wars X-Wing
Warhammer 40K
Warmachine
Warhammer Age of Sigmar
Hordes


----------



## Maelish

[MENTION=1]Morrus[/MENTION],

Thanks, that explains quite a bit.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Hussar said:


> Perhaps the bigger takeaway here is just how much TTRPG's have grown since the release of 5e.  There were ballpark estimates of the TTRPG market being about 30 million in the 3e years,



 I heard they were guestimating around 20 million c2007 - maybe 25+ million as potential growth.  As contrasted to the 50-100 million of a Hasbro 'Core Brand' at the time.  







> in the 4e years, particularly when WotC stopped producing new books (one number I heard tossed around was about 15 million).



 Yep. 







> If that's true...



 Doubled since the end of the 3e era seems a pretty safe claim.  That's equivalent to 6% annual growth.  Only the heath care industry would turn up it's nose at that kind of growth.  



Morrus said:


> We’re not discussing global sales of games and puzzles. We’re discussing the North American hobby game market. Entirely different thing.



 It is an interesting perspective, though.  As tiny as RPGs are compared to the giants of the 'hobby game' market, that whole market, itself, isn't exactly a major segment of the global market for games in general...




Hussar said:


> Yeah, I imagine that you can massage the numbers a number of different ways depending on what you include and exclude.  I mean, puzzles, I imagine, are a pretty big thing world wide.  I know I certainly see them everywhere.



 'Gaming' in the sense of gambling (and it is often used in that sense outside of TT & video gaming circles) is obviously enormous, for instance.




Mercurius said:


> Interesting data. To me this is an awful hybrid of Idiocracy and Sturgeon's Law writ large: People prefer easy, instant gratification entertainment. Going to the movies or playing a video game (or most video games) requires little to no imagination and creativity.



 We're not fringe, we're Elite?


----------



## ChampionoftheTriad

So, I suppose we should all thank our lucky stars that we have nice printed books at all. The good news, is that the entire industry could dry up and blow away tomorrow, and we'd all have enough gaming materials to play for multiple lifetimes.


----------



## Mercurius

Hussar said:


> I'm not sure I'd blame people too much for that though.  Running a game is not easy and it's a HUGE time sink.  I can totally understand why someone isn't interested in it.  Never minding that trying to organize a group on a regular basis can be a big nightmare as well.
> 
> There's a bunch of pretty big hurdles that you need to jump in order to have a good gaming group that routinely produces fun sessions.  Really, it's no different than restaurants.  Sure, there's all sorts of fantastic restaurants serving wonderful food out there, but, y'know what?  McDonalds fits the bill.  Never minding that going to a restaurant is essentially just consuming other people's work.  It's not like i have to do any work to sit down in a restaurant.  But, do I prefer easy, instant gratification just because I haven't learned how to be a sushi chef?  Not really.  I'm just not interested in learning how to be a sushi chef.
> 
> It's easy to pooh pooh going to the movies or playing a video game, but, let's be honest here, both are pretty fun things to do.  People aren't wrong for preferring them.




I'm not blaming anyone for anything, and I love going to the movies (although not a big fan of video games). I'm not even saying people are "wrong" for preferring them, but on the other hand I do think some activities are generally more creative, imagination, life-affirming, etc.



Tony Vargas said:


> We're not fringe, we're Elite?




Well, sometimes the two overlap. But I wouldn't say tabletop RPGs are "elite" as much as they are a highly creative activity that requires a large amount of effort and use of imagination.


----------



## Henry

Mercurius said:


> Well, sometimes the two overlap. But I wouldn't say tabletop RPGs are "elite" as much as they are a highly creative activity that requires a large amount of effort and use of imagination.



The irony is that the RPG and Comic Book markets are the markets that drive the creative fuel of the film and computer game markets, yet see the least return; but then, that's all of life. By its nature, you buy a handful of stuff, and then get tons of return value on comparatively small purchases, but with computer games, movies, collectible games, you're ALWAYS needing to buy more. A computer game that you get 80 hours of entertainment out of is considered a "huge" game, with most games being more like 40 or 50 hours; We get hundreds of hours out of the 5e or Pathfinder core sets alone, for about the same costs.

Some computer games break this mold, like Fallout 4, Skyrim, etc. but those are uncommon in the industry, likely due to the time and expense involved in production. Playing devil's advocate a moment, what production house wants to spend 5 years making a massive game that costs the same to buy as a game you can turn out in one or two years, for a tenth of the QA and production costs and sell for the same price and sell more units of, and the market just turns around and says, "more, please?" Massive CRPGs still make money, it's why we still get them, but the model is not as friendly to the bottom line, and I would guess for similar reasons of time and expense.


----------



## Jay Verkuilen

ChapolimX said:


> So we can say, backed by statistics, we are the coolest kids in town?
> Plus, since the mainstream market of video games draw a lot of inspiration from tabletop RPG, we can say we are trendy too?



So... the hipster defense?


----------



## Jay Verkuilen

Hussar said:


> I'm not sure I'd blame people too much for that though.  Running a game is not easy and it's a HUGE time sink.  I can totally understand why someone isn't interested in it.  Never minding that trying to organize a group on a regular basis can be a big nightmare as well.



Yes, having come off running a game for a while where the "herding cats" problem got way out of hand, I have to say I'm burned out from it. All too often scheduling falls to the DM, too, which is one of the most thankless and awful tasks around. 



> It's easy to pooh pooh going to the movies or playing a video game, but, let's be honest here, both are pretty fun things to do.  People aren't wrong for preferring them.



Yeah, and you can understand why games that don't involve any kind of DM labor, most notably coop video games, are often popular. I don't like them myself because most of them are essentially "shoot and loot" type games without any story, but for people who were playing mostly "shoot and loot" type tabletop why bother with the complexity of a tabletop game?


----------



## Jay Verkuilen

Paul3 said:


> Collectible games more or less require constant purchases. They aren't marketing any better. It is just the nature of the game. Compared to board games, RPGs are in an interesting position in that I can sit down and play a game of Dominion in 45 minutes, which works for many lifestyles. RPGs, by their nature, require what....3-4 hour sessions, which is great for those that are into them, but bad for pulling in the casual player.  In other words, what makes them awesome fun is also what limits their audience.  You are simply appealing to a smaller group of potential customers, but with arguably a much greater intensity.



Collectibles also have the substantial benefit of supporting pickup play way more easily than RPGs. The rules are usually written on the card or are pretty short once you know them. Getting into M:tG is pretty easy with a pre-constructed deck. Players who don't know each other can sit down and play together in a way that's more challenging with a TTRPG. Hobby board games are kind of intermediate in the sense that many have more complicated rules and players can't easily bring their own gear. The fact that collectibles involve lots of repeat purchases is a big plus for publishers, too.


----------



## Charon'sLittleHelper

Henry said:


> The irony is that the RPG and Comic Book markets are the markets that drive the creative fuel of the film and computer game markets, yet see the least return; but then, that's all of life.




I think that's largely due to the cost/risk involved.

Coming out with a new TTRPG, novel, or comic book costs a few thousand dollars.

Coming out with even a AA video game or movie costs millions.

Therefore movies & video games don't want to take major risks when other media can.  Hence their wanting to re-use premises from other media which are already proven to be solid.  Sure - they're gaining something of a fan base, but it's moreso because it's been proven in the cheaper media already.

It's not really surprising.  It's just good business.  (And it's why indie films CAN take bigger risks, though frankly, many suck in ways that has nothing to do with their lower budgets.)


----------



## The_Gunslinger658

I went to my local game shop yesterday and bought Tales from the Yawning Portal, $55.00 bucks it costed me. Sure I could have gone on ebay and got it for half of that but I want to help my local game store. Still, that is expensive and how these places survive is beyond me.


----------



## jmucchiello

Not sure this relates, but I always like to compare the RPG market to the market for things like soccer goal nets. There is definitely a market for soccer goal nets. But the number of people playing soccer is not directly related to sales of soccer goal nets. Many people play soccer for decades and never even consider buying a soccer goal net.


----------



## GameDaddy

Morrus said:


> Pretty tiny, is the answer. As of 2016/2017 it's about $35m in size, according to ICv2. That's of a Hobby Games market currently worth just over a billion dollars.




This is the most BS thing I have ever seen you post here. Please stop, unless you care to do real research, ICv 2 is full of you know what...

Just to start, the last time I tracked revenues for WOTC RPGs which was in the early 2000s. D&D 3e alone was netting more than $35M annually for WOTC in the United States. Now there were a few years during the 4e era where net revenues dropped, but on the whole, revenues have been increasing for hobby gaming and specifically for RPGs and collectible card games by an average of 7-10% per year. That would mean D&D should be netting somewhere in the neighborhood of around $70 Million a year right now, and I would not be surprised to see that figure significantly higher with foreign and overseas sales included.

A quick check with the Dun & Bradstreet Hoover report indicates that in 2016 Wizards of the Coast generated over $295 Million Dollars in revenues, now that income estimate is for both D&D as well as Magic:the Gathering, and whatever else WOTC may be hawking, but I'm pretty sure that $70 Million would not be an unreasonable figure out of that just for D&D 5e sales. 

Then there is all the other "RPG Gaming" companies. Paizo, Warhammer, Steve Jackson Games, Modiphus, Catalyst Game Labs... and so many more. Do you really think that Paizo makes less than $5 million a year when they have been the #1 RPG sales company for the last three years running, really? So hobby gaming is much larger than anything ICv would admit to, mostly on account ICv is a mouthpiece for, and wants to hawk video games and support the movie industry franchises (Which still despises the hobby gaming Industry in general and the RPG gaming Industry in particular) games over anything the home-brewed hobby industry. ...and these are just the American Game companies I'm talking about.  pls do more research before posting unsubstantiated claims like this on your own message boards.

Hobby Gaming has been growing again by extraordinary leaps and bounds over the last few years...

D&B Hoover Report on WOTC 2016 link
http://www.hoovers.com/company-info...izards_of_the_coast_llc.3b95001d3cb27d0c.html

Hasbro 2017 10k filing with the SEC confirming 10% growth for Hobby Games
https://www.last10k.com/sec-filings/has/0001193125-17-052143.htm#fullReport

Marketwatch report on Hasbro 2017
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/has/financials


----------



## Morrus

GameDaddy said:


> This is the most BS thing I have ever seen you post here. Please stop




I think you may be confused. You appear to be under the bizarre impression that you’re the boss of me. 



> Just to start, the last time I tracked revenues for WOTC RPGs which was in the early 2000s. D&D 3e alone was netting more than $35M annually for WOTC in the United States.




Cite? Why should I believe your tracking over ICv2s? 



> the last time I tracked revenues for WOTC RPGs which was in the early 2000s.




It will need to be a lot more recent than that.


----------



## LordEntrails

[MENTION=80711]GameDaddy[/MENTION],
Have you ever heard the saying that starts "You catch more flies..."? 

Starting off so incredibly insulting is not the way to make your point. If someone can throw out or completely ignore your first two paragraphs, you actually start to say something worthwhile and give some reasonable support for it.

Now if you want to actually be helpful and not act like a troll, you could actually take that data you cite and put it into graphs, numbers, charts or other format for those of use without an understanding of financial statements that presents it in a factual, simplified, and  useful for this audience manner.


----------



## Hussar

Umm, Paizo has been number one for the past three years?  Did I read that right?  Where is that from?  As I understand it, the only time Paizo pulled ahead of WotC was the tail end of 4e and then when WotC spent two years not putting out any books at all. 

I don't think I buy that Paizo is selling better than WotC.


----------



## The_Gunslinger658

I think with 4E sucking so bad, Paizo was able to out sell WoTC during the bad days of 4E. I know I quit playing when 4E came out, that was not D&D, I wonder how many others quit because that really affected WoTC to the point that 4E must have been the shortest lived edition in D&D history.




Hussar said:


> Umm, Paizo has been number one for the past three years?  Did I read that right?  Where is that from?  As I understand it, the only time Paizo pulled ahead of WotC was the tail end of 4e and then when WotC spent two years not putting out any books at all.
> 
> I don't think I buy that Paizo is selling better than WotC.


----------



## Joseph Nardo

What is really fascinating is that the global "games" market which includes everything that is considered gaming has eclipsed $24 billion!. It has even surpassed the global market for box office movies!!!!.


----------



## GameDaddy

Morrus said:


> I think you may be confused. You appear to be under the bizarre impression that you’re the boss of me.




Uhhhmm. no, not the boss of you, just displeased that you would not do proper research before estimating the size of the RPG Industry.




Morrus said:


> Cite? Why should I believe your tracking over ICv2s?




Already provided. D&B Says WOTC earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $295 Million in 2016. That's D&D, Magic, Everything else. Magic is still #1 of course. I have seen D&D 5e in every book and game store still around. That means it's probably #2. What makes you think WOTC would be earning less than they did in 2003-2005? ...and we are not even looking at the other big RPG companies. green Ronin, SJG Games. Games Workshop.


Ooooh... check this out. Earning report for Games Workshop alone from June-November of 2016 - 13.8 Million pounds _AFTER EXPENSES_, which is something like $17.6 Million dollars at current exchange rates, they alone are earning almost $40 million a year AFTER EXPENSES. WOTC is still bigger than them. What does that make your ridiculous claim.

Games Workshop Earning Report 2016 (1/2 year report)
https://19485-presscdn-0-14-pagely....ads/2017/01/2016-17-Press-Statement-final.pdf





Morrus said:


> It will need to be a lot more recent than that.




_Why are you pretending the established RPG companies are not making any money?

You can still redeem yourself by being a man, and fessing up, and then go do some real research and report back on your website with some semblance of truth, instead of the absolutely ridiculous claim you started this thread with._


----------



## Morrus

GameDaddy said:


> Uhhhmm. no, not the boss of you, just displeased that you would not do proper research before estimating the size of the RPG Industry.




You’re still confused. I haven’t estimated anything. I am reporting on the estimates of an industry magazine, as I have done for many years now.



> Already provided. D&B Says WOTC earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $295 Million in 2016. That's D&D, Magic, Everything else. Magic is still #1 of course. I have seen D&D 5e in every book and game store still around. That means it's probably #2. What makes you think WOTC would be earning less than they did in 2003-2005? ...and we are not even looking at the other big RPG companies. green Ronin, SJG Games. Games Workshop.




Lots of guessing there. Why should I believe your guesses over ICv2’s research? Who are you? 

You need to put up or shut up. Present your research. If it’s credible, I’ll gladly report on it. 



> Ooooh... check this out. Earning report for Games Workshop alone from June-November of 2016 - 13.8 Million pounds _AFTER EXPENSES_, which is something like $17.6 Million dollars at current exchange rates, they alone are earning almost $40 million a year AFTER EXPENSES. WOTC is still bigger than them. What does that make your ridiculous claim.




OK..

First: calm down. You’re getting excited.

Second: you are comparing different markets. WotC isn’t D&D and Games Workshop isn’t roleplaying games.

Third: if you have an issue with ICv2’s research, take it up with them. If you have credible alternate research, present it, and I might report on it. 



> Why are you pretending the established RPG companies are not making any money?
> 
> You can still redeem yourself by being a man, and fessing up, and then go do some real research and report back on your website with some semblance of truth, instead of the absolutely ridiculous claim you started this thread with.[/I]




Oh, for goodness’ sake. I don’t have time for baby internet anger-monkeys. Learn some basic social skills or go elsewhere. “Redeem yourself”, “be a man”, “fess up”, “ridiculous claim” – really? All in one sentence? About some industry stats? Dude.


----------



## GameDaddy

Joseph Nardo said:


> What is really fascinating is that the global "games" market which includes everything that is considered gaming has eclipsed $24 billion!. It has even surpassed the global market for box office movies!!!!.




Umm. sorry no. Box office revenues for movies in 2016 was somewhere in the neighborhood of 71-91 Billion Dollars U.S. let's see....

Global Games Market 2016 (This is everything included and especially video games)
https://newzoo.com/insights/article...aches-99-6-billion-2016-mobile-generating-37/

Global Theater/Box Office Revenues 2016
https://www.statista.com/topics/964/film/

Film Entertainment Revenue in the U.S. 2016
https://www.statista.com/statistics/259984/filmed-entertainment-revenue-in-the-us/

...and you can get a second opinion by adding up all the top grossing movies worldwide for yourself...
http://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/domestic/all-movies/cumulative/

If the tabletop games market is 24+, it still has to beat 39 or so, to eclipse movie earnings at the box office in the United States alone.


----------



## GameDaddy

Morrus said:


> Oh, for goodness’ sake. I don’t have time for baby internet anger-monkeys. Learn some basic social skills or go elsewhere. “Redeem yourself”, “be a man”, “fess up”, “ridiculous claim” – really? All in one sentence? About some industry stats? Dude.




I'm not angry. just disappointed. I see you opted not to man up. congratulations.


----------



## Morrus

GameDaddy said:


> I'm not angry. just disappointed. I see you opted not to man up. congratulations.




Yeah, bye. Don’t post in this thread again.


----------



## Joseph Nardo

I've been trying to find what is the rpg growth potential for 2020 but have not been able to find d anything. I'm curious to see what it could be. I think that by 2020, the rpg market will grow significantly.


----------



## see

Gareman said:


> When Wizards of the Coast allows Amazon to sell the Player's Handbook below distribution costs, well duh. It hurts new player acquisition as the FLGS is the acknowledged marketing arm of the game trade.



How exactly would you expect Wizards to stop this?

I mean, I don't know if Wizards is selling directly to Amazon.  But refusing to is pretty much the only thing they could do, and that wouldn't be able to stop a distributor who bought PHBs from turning around and selling a bulk order to Amazon for less per unit than they sell to hobby retailers.  Any restrictions they tried to place on distributor resales would skirt US antitrust laws, and the more effective the restrictions at forcing Amazon's prices up, the more likely they'd be found to liable in a lawsuit and forced to pay treble damages.


----------



## Gareman

see said:


> How exactly would you expect Wizards to stop this?




Publishers have plenty of strategies to implement brand protection that doesn't run afoul of antitrust laws. We've seen this already with a number of publishers, with Asmodee being the biggest and most recent example. There is nothing stopping WOTC from protecting their brand other than their will to do so. It's one of those taboo discussion points as well. They're willing to discuss anything but this.


----------



## Morrus

Gareman said:


> When Wizards of the Coast allows Amazon to sell the Player's Handbook below distribution costs, well duh. It hurts new player acquisition as the FLGS is the acknowledged marketing arm of the game trade.




They mitigate that a bit by letting FLGS' have the books 11 days early, and by running a massive Organised Play program which is geared towards player acquisition.


----------



## Maxperson

Is there a reason why you compared the hobby market from the US and Canada only to the global market for film and entertainment?  That doesn't seem accurate to me.


----------



## see

Gareman said:


> Publishers have plenty of strategies to implement brand protection that doesn't run afoul of antitrust laws. We've seen this already with a number of publishers, with Asmodee being the biggest and most recent example.



There are three problems comparing Asmodee to WotC here.

First, almost everything in US antitrust law is governed by the "rule of reason" and issues of market power.  Which in practice means the larger your market share, the more things that will violate antitrust law; a (say) #3 company with 15% market share can do all sorts of things that would be illegal for (say) a market leader with 40%.  So restrictions from the publisher of D&D are more likely to provoke antitrust issues than those of more niche games.

Second, smaller companies are much harder to successfully extract worthwhile damages from than larger ones.  The bigger your market share, the higher the likely damages awarded; the bigger your company, the more likely you are to pay out the damages rather than go bankrupt.  Both mean Hasbro (market cap $14.5 billion) is more likely to get threatened by a lawsuit by (say) Amazon than two-orders-of-magnitude-smaller Asmodee (implicit valuation around €0.14 billion, based on a 2013 investment); there's more likely to be a financial return on the expense of the lawsuit.

Third, it is quite likely that Hasbro and Asmodee evaluate the risks differently because Asmodee is fundamentally a European company, and European antitrust law is focused more on the health of businesses than the impact on consumers.  Agreements restricting the rights of distributors and retailers and establishing minimum prices and the like are vastly more acceptable under European antitrust laws than US, and thus corporate culture is far less wary about imposing them.  Add in that US culture tends to be more litigious than European, and there are lots of things a European company (especially one with few American lawyers) would be willing to tell a US subsidiary to do that a US company (especially one with a large legal department) would prohibit a division/subsidiary from doing.

Now, obviously, this is all speculative and amateur outsider estimation rather than insider knowledge.  Maybe WotC could, in the case of D&D, copy Asmodee safely.  But it's likely that Hasbro legal doesn't think that the health of FLGSes is remotely worth the legal risk, which would also explain why they'd prohibit WotC employees from talking about the issue.


----------



## Jay Verkuilen

Gareman said:


> Publishers have plenty of strategies to implement brand protection that doesn't run afoul of antitrust laws. We've seen this already with a number of publishers, with Asmodee being the biggest and most recent example. There is nothing stopping WOTC from protecting their brand other than their will to do so. It's one of those taboo discussion points as well. They're willing to discuss anything but this.



Well the do soft brand protection, for instance by releasing to FLGSes early. They don't participate in Bits 'n Mortar, but if they did that would be another way.


----------



## Charon'sLittleHelper

see said:


> Add in that US culture tends to be more litigious than European, and there are lots of things a European company (especially one with few American lawyers) would be willing to tell a US subsidiary to do that a US company (especially one with a large legal department) would prohibit a division/subsidiary from doing.




I'll just hop in and say that it's not a cultural issue.  It's a legal one.

The US is one of the only countries in the world which doesn't have a loser pays system.  In virtually every other country, if you sue someone and lose, you have to pay their legal fees they spent defending themselves.  In the US the only drawback is the cost of your own attorney, and a LOT of lawyers are willing to work for 1/3 of the payout if they think they have a halfway decent shot of making bank.  That's what all of the ambulance chasers are talking about in commercials when they say "I don't get paid unless you get paid".  They'll do it for a 5-10% chance of victory if the potential payout is big enough.

There are disadvantages to it as well - but I still think that the US should switch to a loser pays system to cut down on all of the crazy frivolous lawsuits.  (It would also help with healthcare costs.  My sister, a doctor, has been sued about some crazily stupid stuff - which jacks up her malpractice insurance and makes her need to charge patients more to pay for it.)


----------



## Ilbranteloth

Gareman said:


> 3. The consensus, because nobody knows anything in the game trade for sure, is well over half of RPG sales happen online, mostly Amazon. When Wizards of the Coast allows Amazon to sell the Player's Handbook below distribution costs, well duh. It hurts new player acquisition as the FLGS is the acknowledged marketing arm of the game trade.




WotC doesn't "allow" Amazon to sell it below distribution costs.

It is illegal for a manufacturer to set the price a retailer can sell it (in the US and Canada at least). They can't do anything at all about Amazon's price (other than raise the wholesale price). But Amazon can still sell it for a loss if they'd like.

They can institute a Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) policy that would restrict the price that Amazon can post on their page. You'd have to add it to a shopping cart to see the price.


----------



## see

Ilbranteloth said:


> It is illegal for a manufacturer to set the price a retailer can sell it (in the US and Canada at least).



That's slightly outdated.  While minimum resale price agreements used to be _per se_ illegal in the U.S. (and had been since 1911's _Dr. Miles Medical Co._ decision), ten years ago the US Supreme Court moved it to a "rule of reason" offense in _Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc._  So it's now _possible_ to legally set a minimum price for retailers in the U.S., _if_ you can satisfy a court that you're not restraining trade to the detriment of consumers.


----------



## Emerikol

I'm not faulting you because it's very interesting data.  I do though think sales is not the true measure of how much something is played.  Roleplaying games just cost a lot less in financial investment than non-roleplaying games.   Now I agree that we are very small.  Maybe though not as small as these numbers indicate if hours played was the comparison instead of money spent.


----------



## Giorgicus

Given the limitations of the research in the OP, it is still nice to see this information each year. I enjoy seeing which RPGs are in the fight for the top five rankings. 

I am an "all of the above" gamer; I play dice games, card games, board games, online games, mobile games, PC games, console games, miniature games, role-playing games, with legos, hope to one day play at a convention games, and dream about games. Am I part of the problem, or part of the solution for making my favorite RPG hobby thrive?


----------



## Morrus

Emerikol said:


> I'm not faulting you because it's very interesting data.  I do though think sales is not the true measure of how much something is played.  Roleplaying games just cost a lot less in financial investment than non-roleplaying games.   Now I agree that we are very small.  Maybe though not as small as these numbers indicate if hours played was the comparison instead of money spent.




It’s only measuring market share. Any other metrics are their own thing.


----------



## Darkness

The_Gunslinger658 said:


> ... 4E sucking so bad ... I know I quit playing when 4E came out, that was not D&D ...



*Keep it civil, please. We really don't need any more edition warring on these boards - no matter which edition you happen to prefer or dislike.*


----------



## The_Gunslinger658

Whoa mohammad; Over in the 5E section, there is a thread bashing Forgotten Realms, I like the realms, but I am not going to huff and puff over people who dislike it, it is there right as Americans to voice their opinion on what they feel is right or wrong with the realms. The same I think should go with 4E, if people do not like it, than let people speak freely about and not have a russian like attitude towards free speech. We are grown all grown men and know how to ignore threads that might get peoples blood boiling. 





Darkness said:


> *Keep it civil, please. We really don't need any more edition warring on these boards - no matter which edition you happen to prefer or dislike.*


----------



## Morrus

The_Gunslinger658 said:


> Whoa mohammad; Over in the 5E section, there is a thread bashing Forgotten Realms, I like the realms, but I am not going to huff and puff over people who dislike it, it is there right as Americans to voice their opinion on what they feel is right or wrong with the realms. The same I think should go with 4E, if people do not like it, than let people speak freely about and not have a russian like attitude towards free speech. We are grown all grown men and know how to ignore threads that might get peoples blood boiling.




Don’t argue publicly with moderators, please. If you want to ask Darkness about moderation, you can contact him directly.


----------



## LordEntrails

[MENTION=22387]The_Gunslinger658[/MENTION], FYI, we are not all men, we are not all grown, and we are not all Americans. We should always try to keep the diversity of ENWorld in mind and try to stay inclusive.


----------



## Hussar

Neverminding opening a post with a racial slur.  Yeesh.


----------



## darjr

I had a bit of an interesting conversation. Right now the PHB is at 88 of all books. Lowest I've seen it. But someone said that to be there it had to sell something like 100 books a day to stay in the top 100 - 500 day after day. Does that sound reasonable? It was at 64 the other day right next to The Great Gatsby that USA Today said, in 2013, sold 500,000+ copies.


----------



## The_Gunslinger658

If you had bothered to do your research, "Whoa Mohammad" is the battle cry of the British 2nd Parachute Battalion at the Battle of Arnhem Bridge. So please do not accuse me of a racial slur. 




Hussar said:


> Neverminding opening a post with a racial slur.  Yeesh.


----------



## Hussar

The_Gunslinger658 said:


> If you had bothered to do your research, "Whoa Mohammad" is the battle cry of the British 2nd Parachute Battalion at the Battle of Arnhem Bridge. So please do not accuse me of a racial slur.




Yes, just because the British said it makes it less of a racial slur?


----------



## Tony Vargas

Hussar said:


> Yes, just because the British said it makes it less of a racial slur?



 Less of a slur than if an American said it, more than if a Canadian did, I think, is how it would go.  But I don't have my ethical-relativist slide-rule handy, so I'm just ballpark'n it.


----------



## Yaztromo

Thank you very much for this very interesting piece of information!


----------



## Morrus

Hussar said:


> Yes, just because the British said it makes it less of a racial slur?




I think it's probably OK if he was a member of the British 2nd Parachute Battalion at the Battle of Arnhem Bridge.

I suspect he was not, though.


----------



## The_Gunslinger658

Morrus said:


> I think it's probably OK if he was a member of the British 2nd Parachute Battalion at the Battle of Arnhem Bridge.
> 
> I suspect he was not, though.




Here is the info on the brit para units warcry:

https://www.quora.com/World-War-II-...-the-British-airborne-division-The-Red-Devils


----------



## LordEntrails

The_Gunslinger658 said:


> Here is the info on the brit para units warcry:
> 
> https://www.quora.com/World-War-II-...-the-British-airborne-division-The-Red-Devils



I think you miss the point. It's not that we don't believe you that it was a battle cry. 

You miss the point, just because someone or some organization used/uses a word or phrase and even if they did not mean it as a slur, that has absolutely nothing to do with determining if it was/is a racial slur or not.

Perhaps it is our time of concern with political correctness etc. But their are dozen (and probably thousands) of terms/phrases that were once used that are no longer socially acceptable. The easiest of these is the "N" word for blacks which is now almost universally avoided. But others include things like "Squaw", "Redskin"...etc.


----------



## Ted Serious

15 million people play D&D but the whole RPG industry is 35 million.  That doesn't add up.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> 15 million people play D&D but the whole RPG industry is 35 million.  That doesn't add up.




Why not?


----------



## Pauper

It's a complicated issue, so taking any one source and treating it as authoritative is probably putting more weight on that data than it can really support, even if there are few other sources for the data.

It's kind of like saying, because we only have Aristotle's word for all this 'science' stuff, then Aristotle must have been right about everything he wrote.

With that said, the data on the overall size of the market is probably in the ballpark, since other data seems to be within the same order of magnitude. The NPD Group, for instance, does retail tracking for member retailers, and estimates the 'games and puzzles' segment of the North American toy industry to have been just over $2 billion in 2016 and 2017, with 2017 representing 4% growth over 2016.

Trying to extract specific conclusions or strategies from such general data is likely a mistake, though; for instance, some wag at Hasbro might take a look at that linked data and decide where WotC should really be focusing their energy is on RPG material for infants and preschoolers, since that market is, by the NPD numbers, over half again as large as the North American game and puzzle market. I'd like to imagine such a plan would seem ludicrous to the rest of us, but the truth is that extrapolating any kind of strategy out of this thin wash of data invites similar levels of error.

--
Pauper


----------



## Ted Serious

Morrus said:


> Why not?



 The average of 2 bucks and change revenue per player per year seems awfully low.


----------



## Umbran

Gareman said:


> 3. .... It hurts new player acquisition as the FLGS is the acknowledged marketing arm of the game trade.




Except, it isn't.  Maybe it was for a while, but not anymore.  They may *want* the FLGS to be this, but, to be honest, there are not enough of them, and they are generally the haunts of established players who are looking for more game, rather than new players who don't know games.

I think we are back to the apprenticeship model.  New gamers are created by current gamers, not by the FLGS.  It is gaming parents teaching their kids.  It is those kids teaching their friends.  It is gamign clubs in junior high and high schools.  It is people meeting each other in college ad teachign them.  None of this in the FLGS, but in their homes and school venues.

Anyone know how much WotC spends in supporting school gaming clubs?


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> The average of 2 bucks and change revenue per player per year seems awfully low.




I think that works. D&D is one of those hobbies where you don’t need to be a customer to be a player. A lot of players don’t buy books (or if they do, just a PHB). Our group has two PHBs between 6 of us. And only I as the DM get the adventures.


----------



## delericho

Ted Serious said:


> 15 million people play D&D but the whole RPG industry is 35 million.  That doesn't add up.




The vast majority of players buy _nothing_ for the game. Further, of those who do buy something, the vast majority buy the PHB and then nothing else.

(WotC estimate ~15M players in North America, while the PHB has probably sold somewhere between 1 and 2 million copies. Further, WotC's aspiration is that each of their supplements will shift 100k units.)


----------



## Ted Serious

So there's a massive freeloader problem.


----------



## Umbran

Ted Serious said:


> So there's a massive freeloader problem.




Glass half-full/half empty.

You say there's a massive freeloader problem.  I say that RPGs are simply among the most cost-efficient entertainments ever created.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> So there's a massive freeloader problem.




It’s not a problem for me.


----------



## Jer

Ted Serious said:


> So there's a massive freeloader problem.




Not really?  That's how games work in general outside of the video game, miniature or collectable gaming spheres.

If we sit down to play Settlers of Catan it's rare that everyone at the table owns a copy of Settler's of Catan.  Generally only one or two of us own a copy, and we're only going to be playing with one of them anyway so it doesn't matter.  The other 3 players at the table aren't "freeloaders" if they don't own their own copy of the game - they're necessary ingredients for me to get my enjoyment out of the one copy of the game that I've purchased.

Likewise if I'm playing D&D with 4 other people at the table and I as the DM own a ton of books but only one of the others owns a Player's Handbook and the other 3 are using characters made with the Basic Rules, that doesn't make the other 3 "freeloaders" - it makes them necessary ingredients for me to get my enjoyment out of the one copy of the books that I've purchased.  You can't play the game without other people after all.

Also think about that 15 million people figure for a bit.  That's everyone who plays D&D, which I suspect means all editions and not just 5e, but for the sake of the argument assume it's just all 5e players.  That 35 million figure is an annual figure (tracked from 2016/2017).  So even if that 15 million figure were all 5e D&D players and even if every 5e player owns a Player's Handbook, then many of them would STILL have contributed $0 to that $35 million figure because they made that one time purchase in 2014 or 2015 and haven't bought anything since.  Are they freeloaders?  They've paid for a book but still aren't going to be included in that number.

The upshot of this is that there are far, far more D&D players than there are D&D customers.  (But again that's something that's true for most games).


----------



## Jamie Myers

thank you. This was useful


----------



## delericho

Ted Serious said:


> So there's a massive freeloader problem.




Not really.

As the OP notes, the RPG market is _tiny_. That means that the value isn't actually in people buying product - if it was, Hasbro would have cancelled D&D long ago.

But the real value in D&D lies in the brand, and that benefits very significantly from those 15 million people playing - probably more than from the 1-2 million who have actually bought something.

(Indeed, if you could persuade WotC that by giving away the PHB for free to anyone who wants one, they'd guarantee that the upcoming movie did $1B business, they'd probably go for it. Though good luck making _that_ case.  )

Don't get me wrong - WotC would certainly rather see D&D do well than do badly, and they're probably over the moon about 5e's success. But I doubt they're particularly concerned that only a relatively small number of players have actually bought the latest PHB.


----------



## generic

delericho said:


> The vast majority of players buy _nothing_ for the game. Further, of those who do buy something, the vast majority buy the PHB and then nothing else.
> 
> (WotC estimate ~15M players in North America, while the PHB has probably sold somewhere between 1 and 2 million copies. Further, WotC's aspiration is that each of their supplements will shift 100k units.)




Heh, well I know this is true.  I (of course) don't resent them for it, but most (not quite all) of the players at my table neither own nor have any inclination of purchasing even the _Player's Handbook_, let alone an additional supplement like _Xanathar's Guide_.  What have you experienced?


----------



## delericho

Aebir-Toril said:


> Heh, well I know this is true.  I (of course) don't resent them for it, but most (not quite all) of the players at my table neither own nor have any inclination of purchasing even the _Player's Handbook_, let alone an additional supplement like _Xanathar's Guide_.  What have you experienced?




Very much a mix.

The group I'm with have many GMs and play quite a lot of different games. So the tendency is that for any game _other_ than D&D, the GM buys one or more books for the game but the players generally don't bother - it doesn't make sense to buy a book for a game you'll only play a few times.

For D&D (and to a lesser extent Pathfinder), because these get played much more often, it makes some sense for players to buy-in. In this case, maybe half of players get the PHB and nothing else. The people who are DMs as well as players will get the core 3, and may well get some of the supplements also.

(Funnily enough, in my previous group we played 3.5e for years and nobody except me bought _any_ books. With the advent of 4e, the players in the group finally caved and everyone bought a PHB... only to find that we _really_ didn't like it, played it once, and never again. Oops!)


----------



## Jester David

Ted Serious said:


> So there's a massive freeloader problem.



How many PHBs are at your table? How many copies of the _Monster Manual_? How many adventures or _Tome of Foes_? 
Does _everyone_ really have one? 

Most people also only buy the core rules if anything. So revenue for that 15 million people is spread out over the PHB sales of the entire lifetime of the game. The group that bought the rules in 2014 might contribute very little to the revenue in 2017.


----------



## Ted Serious

Jester David said:


> How many PHBs are at your table? How many copies of the _Monster Manual_? How many adventures or _Tome of Foes_?
> Does _everyone_ really have one?
> 
> Most people also only buy the core rules if anything. So revenue for that 15 million people is spread out over the PHB sales of the entire lifetime of the game. The group that bought the rules in 2014 might contribute very little to the revenue in 2017.



There are piles of books at my table and more on shelves.


----------



## Jester David

Ted Serious said:


> There are piles of books at my table and more on shelves.



That is vague and non-helpful.

So let me try again: how many 5th Edition Dungeons & Dragons _Players Handbooks_ are owned by the players of your gaming group(s)?


----------



## LordEntrails

My group has one copy of; PHB, MM, DMG, Volos, Xanathars, SCAG, STK, LMoP, & ToA.

No second copies of anything. Everything is owned in Fantasy Grounds. We can all access it simultaneously, from anywhere. No need for a second copy of anything.

Of course, we have multiple copies of some things from 4E, 3.5, 3E, 2E, AD&D, OD&D...


----------



## SpiralBound

The inherent "freeloader" aspect of RPGs is one of the reasons why I believe the RPG industry will always be much smaller than other segments of the hobby industry.  If only 1 in 4 (or even 1 in 2) RPG players are customers, then the profitability of producing RPG products is accordingly lower than the same commercial investment in a hobby industry where all players are customers.  Take CCGs like MtG, 99% of the time, each player has purchased their own decks to play.  With computer/console games, each player is also a customer.

If you are a company looking to make money from a target market and you look at RPGs with 15 million players in North America, but only 3.75 to 7.5 million of them are likely to be customers, and you then compare it to another market with a 1 for 1 player to customer ratio, it gets a lot harder to justify the expense, or more to the point harder to turn down the potential added revenue to be gained from targeting the other market instead.  It also explains why most RPG companies are staffed by people who genuinely love the RPG hobby.  If they didn't love it so much, they'd be involved in some more profitable venture instead.


----------



## Morrus

For a given tv show or movie on tv or streaming, probably only one person in a household ‘pays’ for it. The rest just join them on the couch to watch it.

Boardgames, too. One person usually has it.


----------



## Ted Serious

delericho said:


> The vast majority of players buy _nothing_ for the game. Further, of those who do buy something, the vast majority buy the PHB and then nothing else.
> 
> (WotC estimate ~15M players in North America, while the PHB has probably sold somewhere between 1 and 2 million copies. Further, WotC's aspiration is that each of their supplements will shift 100k units.)




I am still having trouble understanding how this all adds up.

If a typical group is a DM and 5 players, and they go through 1 AP a year, shouldn't APs be selling a lot more than 100k.  If there are 15 million playing D&D.


----------



## delericho

Ted Serious said:


> I am still having trouble understanding how this all adds up.
> 
> If a typical group is a DM and 5 players, and they go through 1 AP a year, shouldn't APs be selling a lot more than 100k.  If there are 15 million playing D&D.




Presumably the answer is that they _don't_ get through 1 AP a year - either they play Adventurer's League modules, or they homebrew their adventures, or something of that sort.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> I am still having trouble understanding how this all adds up.
> 
> If a typical group is a DM and 5 players, and they go through 1 AP a year, shouldn't APs be selling a lot more than 100k.  If there are 15 million playing D&D.




Not all players keep up with that schedule. You’re counting “dedicated weekly D&D players” not “total D&D players”. 

I’m a D&D player as are the 6 others in my group. The only AP of the modern set we’ve played in full is CoS. We’ve also played some AiME and homebrew.


----------



## Emerikol

I think money wise there is no disputing your data Morrus.  I wish we had data on hours played.  I think rpg's would fare far better but still not beat movies or video games.  

One major problem with RPG's is their inability to monetize customer satisfaction.  For example, if we had to pay 5 dollars to WOTC every time we played in a D&D session, a lot of us would pay it.  Suppose we get the books for free as part of that deal.  If we did that, the amount of money D&D made would skyrocket.  A lot of people do their own worlds and just buy the books on occasion.   Now WOTC has tried to monetize this in the past and failed.  So I don't have a solution but the amount of entertainment provided by RPG companies for the money they make is really low.  So if happiness generated was a measure, we'd fare well against board games I believe.  We'd also bring people together in aways a lot of hobbies don't (e.g. video games) which is a societal positive.


----------



## Ted Serious

Morrus said:


> Not all players keep up with that schedule. You’re counting “dedicated weekly D&D players” not “total D&D players”.
> 
> I’m a D&D player as are the 6 others in my group. The only AP of the modern set we’ve played in full is CoS. We’ve also played some AiME and homebrew.



What is the criteria for plays D&D.  Are 15 million people  playing D&D 5e on a regular basis.  Or have 15 million people ever played any version of D&D.   15 million expect to play D&D in the next twelve months.  What about Pathfinder, D&D in all but name.  What about D&D games that aren't Pencil & Paper RPG, like Pool of Radiance or Neverwinter Nights.

I it's  15 million 5e D&D players and only 100k customers for supplements, why keep printing books 95% of your fans don't want to buy.


----------



## aramis erak

Jer said:


> Not really?  That's how games work in general outside of the video game, miniature or collectable gaming spheres.
> 
> If we sit down to play Settlers of Catan it's rare that everyone at the table owns a copy of Settler's of Catan.  Generally only one or two of us own a copy, and we're only going to be playing with one of them anyway so it doesn't matter.  The other 3 players at the table aren't "freeloaders" if they don't own their own copy of the game - they're necessary ingredients for me to get my enjoyment out of the one copy of the game that I've purchased.
> 
> Likewise if I'm playing D&D with 4 other people at the table and I as the DM own a ton of books but only one of the others owns a Player's Handbook and the other 3 are using characters made with the Basic Rules, that doesn't make the other 3 "freeloaders" - it makes them necessary ingredients for me to get my enjoyment out of the one copy of the books that I've purchased.  You can't play the game without other people after all.
> 
> Also think about that 15 million people figure for a bit.  That's everyone who plays D&D, which I suspect means all editions and not just 5e, but for the sake of the argument assume it's just all 5e players.  That 35 million figure is an annual figure (tracked from 2016/2017).  So even if that 15 million figure were all 5e D&D players and even if every 5e player owns a Player's Handbook, then many of them would STILL have contributed $0 to that $35 million figure because they made that one time purchase in 2014 or 2015 and haven't bought anything since.  Are they freeloaders?  They've paid for a book but still aren't going to be included in that number.
> 
> The upshot of this is that there are far, far more D&D players than there are D&D customers.  (But again that's something that's true for most games).



That also leaves out that, like my daughter is doing, many are using just the Basic Rules and/or the SRD - both of which are free - to play D&D without paying, but they help create the customer base.

And then, there's the issue that D&D as a tabletop RPG is the inspiration for a much larger D&D brand market; D&D video games have, in the past, sold many more units than the RPG, but the RPG and its designers drive the videogame design sequences.

Also, the overall market is larger than WOTC's $35 M... Adding just a year's worth of KS projects... well, over on RPGG, there's a list of 2017 RPG-KS, and page 1 of 24 sums up (excluding meetups, accessories, and comic collections) over $200 K and over UK £100 K...

There is a lot of money flowing.

And that's not counting the really big ones. 2016, the top 5 RPG kickstarters were $3.5 M or so. 


			
				Steve Dubya on RPGGeek said:
			
		

> 1. 7th Sea Second Edition - $1,316,813; complete
> 2. Invisible Sun - $664,274; complete
> 3. Robert E. Howard's Conan Roleplaying Game - $622,286 (£436,755); complete
> 4. PolyHero Dice - Wizard Set - $575,926; complete
> 5. Rifts for Savage Worlds - $438,076; complete




And for 2017... about $2.1 M...


			
				Steve Dubya on RPGGeek said:
			
		

> Okay, two things. First, this is updated to reflect the insanity that is Numenera.
> 
> 1. Numenera 2: Discovery and Destiny - $845,258; complete
> 2. The Wyrmwood Magnetic Game Master Screen - $387,819; complete
> 3. Torg Eternity - $355,992; complete
> 4. Forbidden Lands - Retro Open-World Survival Fantasy RPG - kr 2,827,818 ($347,355); complete
> 5. Elder Dice - Lovecraftian themed dice for all tabletop games - $261,886; complete
> 
> Second, we're at the same number of pages as last year's tracking, so I think that it's very likely we'll see more than the 547 from then come the end of this year.




And that's not counting over the counter sales on those projects, nor electronic sales after KS completion (via OBS, Here, Backerkit, et)...


Heck, my roughly $500 spent in 2017 included no WOTC materials that I'm aware of. 2018 looks like it's going to be similar. My 15 regulars over that time have bought some $150 in dice, and $300 in books, half of which was for other GM's D&D games...


----------



## Umbran

delericho said:


> Presumably the answer is that they _don't_ get through 1 AP a year - either they play Adventurer's League modules, or they homebrew their adventures, or something of that sort.




Or they just play more slowly.  I have a group that plays once a month, for a few hours each time.  One AP will last me multiple years.


----------



## Jhaelen

Morrus said:


> Not all players keep up with that schedule. You’re counting “dedicated weekly D&D players” not “total D&D players”.



Indeed. Our group started playing 'Rise of the Runelords' in March 2017. In our next session in about two weeks, our party will travel to Magnimar, i.e. we're still in the middle of the second module "The Skinsaw murders".

We barely manage to play monthly and our DM is extending the campaign by creating short 'interludes'. TBH, I'm not sure if we'll ever make it through the entire AP


----------



## MichaelSomething

aramis erak said:


> And then, there's the issue that D&D as a tabletop RPG is the inspiration for a much larger D&D brand market; D&D video games have, in the past, sold many more units than the RPG, but the RPG and its designers drive the videogame design sequences.
> 
> Also, the overall market is larger than WOTC's $35 M... Adding just a year's worth of KS projects... well, over on RPGG, there's a list of 2017 RPG-KS, and page 1 of 24 sums up (excluding meetups, accessories, and comic collections) over $200 K and over UK £100 K...
> 
> There is a lot of money flowing.




GTA 5 made about 2 billion in sales in 2014

Minecraft sold 100 million copies.

Do I need to list more examples?

To give WOTC credit, D&D did outsell Stardew Valley (at least a million copies at $15 a pop).


----------



## Morrus

aramis erak said:


> Also, the overall market is larger than WOTC's $35 M... Adding just a year's worth of KS projects... well, over on RPGG, there's a list of 2017 RPG-KS, and page 1 of 24 sums up (excluding meetups, accessories, and comic collections) over $200 K and over UK £100 K...




It's not "WotC's $35M". The $35M is the tabletop RPG market in North America. And ICv2 includes Kickstarters these days, and yes, Kickstarter is helping to drive that growth.

(Note that 2017 the current size is $45M, up since the above article was written).

http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?1984-Top-5-RPGs-Compiled-Charts-2008-Present#.WV45NMbMxBw


----------



## Ted Serious

Morrus said:


> It's not "WotC's $35M". The $35M is the tabletop RPG market in North America. And ICv2 includes Kickstarters these days, and yes, Kickstarter is helping to drive that growth.



How does that not make it worse?


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> How does that not make it worse?




"Worse" than what? I'm not really understanding your value judgements here, or the things you perceive as problems.


----------



## Ted Serious

Morrus said:


> "Worse" than what? I'm not really understanding your value judgements here, or the things you perceive as problems.



 It's not even all D&D.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> It's not even all D&D.




I don’t really know what that means.


----------



## Ted Serious

Dollars divided by players.   It looked like 2 bucks per player, it's even less.

I pay more than that to play one game.   How is it a hardship to buy one book a year.   D&D would rival Magic with just that bare minimum.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> Dollars divided by players.   It looked like 2 bucks per player, it's even less.




And this bothers you?


----------



## Ted Serious

Morrus said:


> And this bothers you?




Yes.  
Freeloaders bother me.
D&D has supposedly been almost dropped twice for low revenue.


----------



## Morrus

Ted Serious said:


> Yes.
> Freeloaders bother me.
> D&D has supposedly been almost dropped twice for low revenue.




Have you never watched a movie at a friend’s house, borrowed a book, taken a ride in somebody else’s car, or played a board game belonging to somebody else?

Letting other people use your stuff is not freeloading, it’s normal. I’d hate to live in a world where it wasn’t.


----------



## Emerikol

Ted Serious said:


> I it's  15 million 5e D&D players and only 100k customers for supplements, why keep printing books 95% of your fans don't want to buy.




Optional tends to sell less than mandatory.  A LOT of DMs make their own worlds and their own dungeons.  Also, a LOT of people buy rules but never play.  Books sold is no indication of games being played.  I do think Roll20 though provides some good information because it's actually playing sessions.

I own a ton of roleplaying games I have never played.  I enjoy reading rpg rules .


----------



## Hussar

Let's be honest here.  There are very, very few hobbies out there as cheap to enjoy as roleplaying.


----------



## Umbran

Ted Serious said:


> Freeloaders bother me.




They aren't freeloading.  Freeloaders are people who take advantage of the generosity of others, but give nothing in return.  I buy enough stuff for a group to play a game.  They come and _give me a game in return_.  I would not purchase *any* materials if I didn't have a group to play with.  The large number of people who don't need to purchase are required to make the games run.


----------



## Ted Serious

Umbran said:


> They aren't freeloading.  Freeloaders are people who take advantage of the generosity of others, but give nothing in return.  I buy enough stuff for a group to play a game.  They come and _give me a game in return_.  I would not purchase *any* materials if I didn't have a group to play with.  The large number of people who don't need to purchase are required to make the games run.



Players should have their own books that they need to for their characters.  So they aren't constantly passing around one book at the table and can build or level them on their own.

I understand there are casual players.  It surprised if they're such a vast majority.


----------



## Eis

Ted Serious said:


> Players should have their own books that they need to for their characters.  So they aren't constantly passing around one book at the table and can build or level them on their own.
> 
> I understand there are casual players.  It surprised if they're such a vast majority.




its nice but I don't think that it falls under the category of SHOULD

I dm for my son's friends.....a couple of them have bought players' handbooks but not all of them have and it isn't necessary


----------



## Emerikol

Hussar said:


> Let's be honest here.  There are very, very few hobbies out there as cheap to enjoy as roleplaying.




This can't be emphasized enough.  Compared to almost any hobby RPG's are really cheap.  I have two hobbies.  Reading rpg rules and playing rpgs.   The former hobby makes more money for the industry than the latter but it's a team effort.


----------



## Hussar

Ted Serious said:


> Players should have their own books that they need to for their characters.  So they aren't constantly passing around one book at the table and can build or level them on their own.
> 
> I understand there are casual players.  It surprised if they're such a vast majority.




Why surprised?  It's always been thus.  The number of gamers who buy books is a tiny, tiny minority of players.


----------



## Umbran

Hussar said:


> Why surprised?  It's always been thus.  The number of gamers who buy books is a tiny, tiny minority of players.




I dunno if "tiny, tiny minority" is appropriate.  If we say every GM, and then one in five players, on broad average, I think that'd be about right - and that's 20% of players.  A minority, but not a *tiny* minority.


----------



## Neonchameleon

Morrus said:


> However, the entire hobby games market is growing year on year. Just look at the latest stats: the market has grown from $700M in 2013 to $1.19B in 2016/2017. Of that, RPGs have more than doubled in size, from $15M to $35M. Boardgames have over tripled in size. There is definitely a tabletop boom going on right now, powered by a number of factors ranging from Kickstarter, to the introduction of US West Coast media (shows like _Tabletop_ and outlets like _Geek & Sundry_ have helped to mainstream tabletop gaming), and more.




Just to put that into perspective 2013 was the absolute nadir for the RPG market - it was the year where WotC did not put out a single RPG book - none for 4e and 5e wasn't out yet. The goal for 4e was $50 million/year (it didn't make that, but that was considered plausible).


----------



## Hussar

Umbran said:


> I dunno if "tiny, tiny minority" is appropriate.  If we say every GM, and then one in five players, on broad average, I think that'd be about right - and that's 20% of players.  A minority, but not a *tiny* minority.




But, even of DM's, how many DM's are like me that buy the core books and maybe one book every two years?  My "gotta catch'em all" days died in early 2e.  Heck, WotC recognizes that most people aren't buying books and have a production schedule that is the slowest D&D has seen in decades.


----------



## Emerikol

I'd say over 50% of my players owned at least one book.  I as DM always bought all three.  The DMG and MM aren't for PCs anyway right? ;-).   

I think we were old enough during 3e/4e that we could all financially afford it.  In my younger 1e days, I was so desperate to get a monster manual, that I bet my dad I could swim the length of our pool underwater three times.  The pool was 44 feet long.  I didn't drown but I think I was in distress in a very bad way when I finally reached the final steps.   Dad bought me the book.


----------



## Umbran

Hussar said:


> But, even of DM's, how many DM's are like me that buy the core books and maybe one book every two years?  My "gotta catch'em all" days died in early 2e.




Well, you didn't say "The number of gamers who buy *all the books* is a tiny, tiny fraction."  I'm saying the GM and maybe one player in five buys some stuff.  I am agreeing that it isn't a majority, but it isn't "tiny, tiny" either.


----------



## Echohawk

Neonchameleon said:


> Just to put that into perspective 2013 was the absolute nadir for the RPG market - *it was the year where WotC did not put out a single RPG book* - none for 4e and 5e wasn't out yet. The goal for 4e was $50 million/year (it didn't make that, but that was considered plausible).



That's simply not true. WotC released the following print D&D products in 2013:

Unearthed Arcana Premium Reprint (February 2013)
D&D Encounters: Against the Cult of Chaos (February 2013)
Dungeons of Dread Classic Adventure Compilation (March 2013)
D&D Lair Assault: Into the Pit of Madness (March 2013)
Spell Compendium v.3.5 Premium Reprint (April 2013)
D&D Encounters: Storm over Neverwinter (April 2013)
Dungeon Master's Guide Premium Reprint (May 2013)
Monstrous Manual Premium Reprint (May 2013)
Player's Handbook Premium Reprint (May 2013)
Against the Slave Lords Classic Adventure Compilation (June 2013)
D&D Game Day: Vault of the Dracolich (June 2013)
D&D Encounters: Search for the Diamond Staff (June 2013)
Magic Item Compendium v.3.5 Premium Reprint (July 2013)
Murder in Baldur's Gate (August 2013)
Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle (August 2013)
Legacy of the Crystal Shard (November 2013)
Original Edition Premium Reprint (November 2013)

Sure, some of those releases were for organised play, and most of the rest were reprints, but seventeen print products is not the same as "not a single RPG book"!


----------



## Neonchameleon

Echohawk said:


> Sure, some of those releases were for organised play, and most of the rest were reprints, but seventeen print products is not the same as "not a single RPG book"!




Point.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Echohawk said:


> Sure, some of those releases were for organised play, and most of the rest were reprints, but seventeen print products is not the same as "not a single RPG book"!



Only the re-prints were books, and they were, well, re-prints.  The rest were organized play modules, small & cheap (they hadn't formerly charged for them at all, actually).


----------



## Echohawk

Tony Vargas said:


> Only the re-prints were books, and they were, well, re-prints.  The rest were organized play modules, small & cheap (they hadn't formerly charged for them at all, actually).




Some of them were organised play modules (the D&D Encounters and Lair Assault releases). But _Murder in Baldur's Gate_ and _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_ were commercial releases, as was _Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle_ although that was a limited edition Gencon release, I seem to recall.

I'd also not agree with the characterisation of  those releases as "small & cheap". Let's take a closer look at the contents of each:

_D&D Encounters: Against the Cult of Chaos_: 52-page adventure, two fold-out maps
_D&D Lair Assault: Into the Pit of Madness_: 16-page half-sized booklet, map, sheet of cardboard counters
_D&D Encounters: Storm over Neverwinter_: 36-page adventure, two fold-out maps
_D&D Game Day: Vault of the Dracolich_: 24-page adventure, fold-out map, map hand-out
_D&D Encounters: Search for the Diamond Staff_: 40-page adventure, two fold-out maps.
_Murder in Baldur's Gate_: 64-page setting book, 32-page adventure book, DM screen, $34.95
_Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle_: 288-page softcover (included the playtest rules), $29.95
_Legacy of the Crystal Shard_: 64-page setting book, 32-page adventure book, DM screen, $34.95

Okay, so that _Lair Assault_ release is both small (literally) and cheap, I must concede.


----------



## Tony Vargas

Echohawk said:


> Some of them were organised play modules (the D&D Encounters and Lair Assault releases). But _Murder in Baldur's Gate_ and _Legacy of the Crystal Shard_ were commercial releases, as was _Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle_ although that was a limited edition Gencon release, I seem to recall.



 I can't recall when they started charging for Encounters & Lair Assault modules - I mean, I vividly recall it, there was practically a revolt at my FLGS, I just can't recall the timing. 

Judging from only 3 of the things you quote having $$, though, I'm guesing it was sometime /in/ 2013.  So, yeah, free publications did not bring in any revenue.  

That leaves some adventures, notoriously bad sellers to begin with, that were in lines that were /formerly free/, not exactly a high-volume strategy, starting to charge for something you'd been giving away.

So, yeah, hardly suprising that a period when D&D as publishing no rule books (traditionally the better sellers) at all, and the future of the line was still somewhat in doubt, was the revenue nadir of a market traditionally dominated by D&D.


----------



## MichaelSomething

Wait, I thought people complained hardcore about monthly splat book release?  That they didn't want to buy books every month?

I thought people don't want RPGs to be a commercial product but instead be some auteur creation?


----------



## Shasarak

MichaelSomething said:


> Wait, I thought people complained hardcore about monthly splat book release?  That they didn't want to buy books every month?




I thought that was only because of the guy that went around to your house every month and forced you to buy each new book.

Without that guy then you can just choose to buy or not every month, right?


----------



## Tony Vargas

MichaelSomething said:


> Wait, I thought people complained hardcore about monthly splat book release?  That they didn't want to buy books every month?
> 
> I thought people don't want RPGs to be a commercial product but instead be some auteur creation?



 Different thread, different people, different agenda.

In some threads, some of us want D&D to be exclusive non-commerical, to prove how elitist/artistic we are as gamers. 
In other threads, some of us want D&D to be raking in money because it's so popular, to prove how cool and with it we are.


----------



## lowkey13

*Deleted by user*


----------

