>>96025883
>How do you know that D&D is doing so bad if you don't have any numbers?
Oh I dont know at all, I just typed into google "Is Hasbro struggling"
You guys were the ones who have been saying corporate slogans the whole time, not me.
You claim that its the best selling D&D and that everything is fine yet you cant seem to back it up.

>Oh because it came to me in a dream?
No, because as a company they don't behave as they should if it was popular and if they were raking in dosh.
And they sure as fuck wouldn't need guys like you hanging from their ball-sacks, ready to scream "LEAVE CORPORATION ALONE!" if someone dares to ask uncomfortable questions.

>My armchair analysis proves it?
>It just feels that way to me because I want it to be true?
Well, you do demand me to prove a negative so I think you are sweating bullets over how popular it truly was.

>>96025886
>changing corporate landscape
Oh fuck! Now he had to actually to resort to corpospeak to defend BRAND!
Jesus.

You are getting paid for this, right? No?
You are doing this.. for free?
Completely free of charge?
Big oof.

>more work can be done with contracts/temporary workers. a lot of companies let people go once the 'big project' is done.
DAS RITE!
This is merely because they are doing so well.

>people like crawford and mearls eventually caused a stagnant design space in a paradigm that requires innovation to sell more books. this is a neutral outcome.
So its not doing well?

>it's more like there is demand in spite of the hobby stores all closing down. after all, what is the draw of modern hobby stores? the few in my area are focused on board games or trading cards, there aren't many that specialize in ttrpgs precisely because the rpg gamer doesn't need to use physical stores, unlike board gamers or card gamers which rely much more on physical mediums.
Oh okay, its because THING is more popular than EVAR that stores are closing down.
Got it!