3e / OGL All Three 3.5 D&D Books in the Amazon Top 25!

[Obryn]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

It doesn't seem as though its limited availability is causing much of a price spike at all...

EDIT: ..or that selling out its print run resulted in limited availability (on further reflection).

The print run sold out, but that doesn't mean it's unavailable at local retailers. My local bookstores have plenty of copies, and I expect I'm not alone in this.

Also, I would be stunned if someone managed to sell a still-in-print book on eBay for more than Amazon's retail.

-O

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

Hypocrisy?

Every time something similar to this is touted for 4e there is always a host of people attempting to find ways to invalidate the data. Bestseller list? Well, that list doesn't track all trends. Amazon lists? We can't judge the sale of books based on Amazon, that is hardly accurate. Wizards states the books are selling out? Print runs must be tiny to achieve that. The list goes on and on.

But now that the 3e books are showing up on this list the data must somehow be valid.

I am pretty sure that is what Jack99 is referring to.

[Dire Bare]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

Obyrn, that's absolutely true. OOP does usually drive up the price if it is still in demand. However, while it is not a precise measure, it still has some level of accuracy in that the 3.5 phb is selling for more than the 2nd edition phbs as well.

I think 3e books selling for more than 2e books (at least on average) is perfectly normal. Those of us who want books of an edition earlier than 3e have had plenty of time to get them. Plus legal PDFs of almost everything pre-3e have been available for a long time (well, until just recently, of course). And finally, 3e was a more successful and well-designed game than previous editions (IMHO).

3e books selling for more than 4e books makes sense too, both because they are out of print and because this status is pretty new. Plus, while legal 3e PDFs have been available (again, until recently), they were at full MSRP. Eventually, the market for used-3e books will reach an equilibrium like that for pre-3e books.

The one issue with that, though is the new PHBII. It supposedly sold out its print run. You'd think that would drive up the costs for now. However, the prices I see listed that they were sold for were: <snip>

It doesn't seem as though its limited availability is causing much of a price spike at all...

EDIT: ..or that selling out its print run resulted in limited availability (on further reflection).

The 4e PHBII did indeed sell out of its print run. There is no reason to doubt what WotC has stated on this. How large the print run was is irrevelent, at least to this discussion. But, of course, that doesn't mean that the PHBII is sold out at every store, physical or virtual! Plus, smart buyers and sellers both know it will only be a short time before the next print run makes its way into distribution, making artificially higher prices right now silly. There have been reports of at least a few stores trying to charge more than MSRP for the PHBII, but I'll bet those are the stores that still have them in stock!!! I can't imagine there are enough impatient gamers out there who would be willing to pay a premium for a book they can get at a discount if they only wait a month or less.

[Kask]

Originally Posted by alleynbard

Every time something similar to this is touted for 4e there is always a host of people attempting to find ways to invalidate the data. Bestseller list? Well, that list doesn't track all trends.

Who on THIS thread did what you are saying?

[Aberzanzorax]

Originally Posted by Maggan

If I were producing RPGs and weren't WotC holding the D&D license, I would weep at this.

Here's where I show off my ignorance about the history of the industry:


Isn't D&D really the first RPG? Also, was there anything else during its first years of existence?


I mean, think of Kleenex. That's a brand name, but most people I know use the word Kleenex synonymously with tissues. D&D isn't quite that strong brandnamewise (or is it?), but I think that in terms of orders of magnitude, D&D is just waaaay bigger than anyone else. I don't how much bigger, but I'd be shocked if anyone else was even half as big as D&D.


(feel free to shock me, as I said, I'm a bit ignorant on this).

[Mournblade94]

Originally Posted by Jack99

Try reading the many other threads regarding the success of 4e, where we have been told over and over again that these rankings have no meaning nor significance.

But even the person that originated the thread said it may have no significance. All this thread is doing is showing a point of interest.

[Obryn]

Originally Posted by alleynbard

Every time something similar to this is touted for 4e there is always a host of people attempting to find ways to invalidate the data.

Not just this, but it's spun as evidence that 4e is actually failing.

It's a pretty fascinating example of fan psychology.

-O

[Obryn]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

D&D isn't quite that strong brandnamewise (or is it?), but I think that in terms of orders of magnitude, D&D is just waaaay bigger than anyone else. I don't how much bigger, but I'd be shocked if anyone else was even half as big as D&D.

Speaking only of the USA, I'd be shocked if everyone else, combined, is half as big as D&D.

-O

[Aberzanzorax]

Obyrn and Dire Bare, thanks for the education...I think you're both right in your analyses of market trends.

Obyrn, yeah, that was what I meant: everyone combined.

D&D is HUGE.


So, in agreement there as well.


Would it be fair to say, then, that this info (the OP's and my own...not the phbII prices, but the higher costs of the main phbs), while not saying anything bad about 4e, does show that 3e is still fairly strong even a year after it has been discontinued?

[Kask]

Originally Posted by Aberzanzorax

Isn't D&D really the first RPG? Also, was there anything else during its first years of existence?

Arduin, T&T, Traveller to name a few.

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Kask

Who on THIS thread did what you are saying?

Pay attention. I didn't accuse anyone here. I was simply giving an answer as to why Jack said what he said. I honestly don't know if any of you have done that.

But now that you mention it Kask, you started off in this thread insinuating that somehow this indicates 4e is failing and that you doubt the statements coming from Wizards.

[Kask]

Originally Posted by alleynbard

But now that you mention it Kask, you started off in this thread insinuating that somehow this indicates 4e is somehow failing and that you doubt the statements coming from Wizards.

Umm, no. But nice try at trolling.

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Mournblade94

But even the person that originated the thread said it may have no significance. All this thread is doing is showing a point of interest.

I agree. But the moment someone tries to use this data as a valid indicator wouldn't you think the natural response would be "hypocrisy"?

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Kask

Umm, no. But nice try at trolling.

I am hardly a troll Kask and you have established your feelings about Wizards and 4e quite completely on multiple threads.

What exactly do you call your first post? Was it not a insinuation that 4e is doing poorly and we are being lied to? What is it you are trying to say? I will even take your word for it. That is how trusting I am.

Try to answer the question intelligently and not fall back on the troll defense please.

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by Kask

Who on THIS thread did what you are saying?

Become community supporter and find out! It's easy and it's fast, you get to support your favorite D&D website, and you never, ever have to ask this kind of questions again.



I am not going to name and point fingers. It rarely amounts to any fun. Come to think about it, this was probably a waste of time. Please feel free to disregard my previous posts in this thread. This one is not to be ignored though. Support ENworld!

Cheers

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Jack99

Become community supporter and find out! It's easy and it's fast, you get to support your favorite D&D website, and you never, ever have to ask this kind of questions again.



I am not going to name and point fingers. It rarely amounts to any fun. Come to think about it, this was probably a waste of time. Please feel free to disregard my previous posts in this thread. This one is not to be ignored though. Support ENworld!

Cheers

Good advice all around. If I had the money to do so, I would in a heart beat.

I will admit, not sure why I even posted here. I should follow the advice I have given myself so many times and really only post in threads that interest me.

[Mournblade94]

Originally Posted by alleynbard

I agree. But the moment someone tries to use this data as a valid indicator wouldn't you think the natural response would be "hypocrisy"?

Again, if that was the case, then yes I would, but clearly this statistic is not indicative in any way. No more so than I think the amazon sales of 4e are indicative.

[Kask]

Originally Posted by alleynbard

What exactly do you call your first post?

I was pointing out that WotC isn't doing as well as they'd like getting players to switch. Which is also the only reason to pull older ed PDFs...

Next time don't accuse me of something I didn't do. Got it?

[alleynbard]

Originally Posted by Mournblade94

Again, if that was the case, then yes I would, but clearly this statistic is not indicative in any way. No more so than I think the amazon sales of 4e are indicative.

Then you and I agree. I don't think any of that data is worth putting faith in, no matter what edition it applies to. Like you said, very much a point of interest and not much else.

[RefinedBean]

Slap fight!

White Wolf doesn't show up until #48 or so on Imaro's list. I figured they had a little more "oomph" than that.

Still, though, 'tis only Amazon.