D&D 5E The Printers Can't Handle WotC's One D&D Print Runs!

One of the reasons why the three new core rulebooks next year will not be released together is because D&D is such a juggernaut that the printers can't actually handle the size of the print runs!

Jeremy Crawford told Polygon "Our print runs are pretty darn big and printers are telling us you can’t give us these three books at the same time.” And Chris Perkins added that "The print runs we’re talking about are massive. That’s been not only true of the core books, but also Tasha’s Cauldron. It’s what we call a high-end problem."

 

[Hussar]

I'm saying if you respond to my post with a criticism that doesn't apply to me, I'm going to call it out.

The criticism was applied to lots of people. Not just you. Are you saying that no one talks about how dms guild and other fan made material is low quality and poorly thought out mechanically?

 

[Micah Sweet]

The criticism was applied to lots of people. Not just you. Are you saying that no one talks about how dms guild and other fan made material is low quality and poorly thought out mechanically?

Of course not. But by responding to my post with a general statement, you are implying that I fit your criteria, and I don't. To avoid being lumped into the category you created, I refuted it for myself. That's all.

 

[bedir than]

In the EN World Crowdingfunding report the creator of the Mystery Flesh Pit says part of the reason that they are not doing a 5e conversion as the lead of the product is that they would have trouble getting product printed at that demand.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/rpg-crowdfunding-news-%E2%80%93-mystery-flesh-pit-national-park-knave-pacific-rim-kong-and-more.697877/

 

[Hussar]

Of course not. But by responding to my post with a general statement, you are implying that I fit your criteria, and I don't. To avoid being lumped into the category you created, I refuted it for myself. That's all.

So you agree with my general statement. Great. It’s nice when we can agree.

IOW, yes I have considerably more faith in WotC being able to handle game mechanics than the general public.

 

[DEFCON 1]

You could've stopped at 'general public cannot be trusted to design your game for you'. Talking about how no individual in that mass could do a better job than that average, seems an awful lot like 'no-one could design a more nutritious hamburger than McD, because they're big!'

Yes, I was being hyperbolic, so it is fair that you call me out on it. If you'd like, feel free to change 'none' to 'almost none' in my post.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Yes, I was being hyperbolic, so it is fair that you call me out on it. If you'd like, feel free to change 'none' to 'almost none' in my post.

Sure. I am very cool with saying the general public are dumb and as a designer, you should stand behind what you've decided.

Like, WotC using the surveys as rough 'vibe checks' is fine, especially when their design goal is trying to not upset anyone.

 

[Umbran]

I'm saying if you respond to my post with a criticism that doesn't apply to me, I'm going to call it out.

Maybe, before calling it out, you want to consider the possibility that it isn't all about you?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Maybe, before calling it out, you want to consider the possibility that it isn't all about you?

A message in response to me can reasonably be presumed to have to do with me. The "It's not all about you" drum people keep banging on to silence dissent doesn't apply to direct responses.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

It's well below inflation: if they charged the same rate they did in 2014, the books would be ~$63, not under $60. As already notedd by Ryan Dancey on Twitter recently, the 3E FRCS was selling for the equivalent of $68 today, or over $92 CAD.

The 3e FRCS would actually be worth that, there is not a single 5e book that is half as good, except maybe Eberron Rising From the Last War, which is 2 thirds as good. If you could some how add the 3.5e setting expansion to the FRCG no 5e book would be even a third as good, except ERftLW which would be half as good.

5e does a medioce to outright naughty word job of settings, except for ERftLW or maybe Wildemount. The SCAG isn't bad, its just vastly too small.

And many of the rest are good enough to torment you with what they could have been had certain things had been done different.

 

[Henadic Theologian]

Yeah, it doesn't fit the purpose of UA, which is to do desiresbility testing. Which doesn't matter for something as transient as a Monster stat block.

They did test Monster flavor during Next, but that was an evergreen brand effort that they don't need to do more of, it seems.

We aren't in the MM phase of the RD&D playtest yet, so that flavour thing, and should, happen given its where WotC is weakest.