the Jester
Legend
How would whether a book of monsters is hardbound or softbound affect your decision to buy it?
Last edited:
Hardback or softback?
the Jester
Legend
Now why couldn't I post a poll??
Mercule
Adventurer
Well, since I'm the only one to have answered, feel free to post a different thread. 
Personally, I _greatly_ prefer sourcebooks to be hardbound. Some people will happily pay extra for color art, to which I'm indifferent at best. Me, I'm turned on by a book whose covers won't roll up.
Personally, I _greatly_ prefer sourcebooks to be hardbound. Some people will happily pay extra for color art, to which I'm indifferent at best. Me, I'm turned on by a book whose covers won't roll up.
EarthsShadow
First Post
put me in the hardback side also. They just look nicer and are easier to take care of ... but be careful if you have cats that like to chew on cardboard, mine do and i have a couple of books that they had chewed on while i wasn't looking.
Mercule
Adventurer
I'll agree with the size issue. Personally, that just means that I'd rather see larger books.
Honestly, I _don't_ like the binders, at least not the way the Monstrous Compendium was done. I can see the lure, but I never took mine apart (to carry select monsters to a game). Adding in the expanded packs was a pain, too, because they often didn't alphabetize correctly. My pages kept tearing, too, and I'm pretty careful with my books.
Honestly, I _don't_ like the binders, at least not the way the Monstrous Compendium was done. I can see the lure, but I never took mine apart (to carry select monsters to a game). Adding in the expanded packs was a pain, too, because they often didn't alphabetize correctly. My pages kept tearing, too, and I'm pretty careful with my books.
GnomeWorks
Adventurer
If the pages will lay flat, then I like hardcover.
Otherwise, softcover.
Interior art is nice, but it shouldn't dominate the page.
Page format is important, too - I prefer the format that SSS uses for CC and CC2, over the format that WotC used for MM MM2.
Otherwise, softcover.
Interior art is nice, but it shouldn't dominate the page.
Page format is important, too - I prefer the format that SSS uses for CC and CC2, over the format that WotC used for MM MM2.
Silver Griffon
Explorer
I make my judgement based on flavor.
Hardshells are good, but you can't beat softshell with garlic and white wine sauce.
Hardshells are good, but you can't beat softshell with garlic and white wine sauce.
haiiro
First Post
For me this depends on the size of the book, as others have mentioned. I prefer larger gaming books to be hardcover because they'll last longer, particularly if they see heavy use (which most good monster books do). Smaller collections -- Armies of the Abyss, Jade Dragons & Hungry Ghosts, Monsters of Faerun, etc. -- don't need to be hardcover.
At the same time, as long as the content is worthwhile I don't really mind how a book is bound. AEG's Mercenaries, for example, is a 256 page softcover book -- despite being more than large enough to justify being hardbound -- but that didn't stop me from buying it.
I really disliked the old binder system, mainly because the pages tore out and integrating new material was a pain in the butt -- especially with the smaller expansions, where an "M" monster might be followed by an "O" monster, meaning something would be out of order wherever you chose to put it.
At the same time, as long as the content is worthwhile I don't really mind how a book is bound. AEG's Mercenaries, for example, is a 256 page softcover book -- despite being more than large enough to justify being hardbound -- but that didn't stop me from buying it.
I really disliked the old binder system, mainly because the pages tore out and integrating new material was a pain in the butt -- especially with the smaller expansions, where an "M" monster might be followed by an "O" monster, meaning something would be out of order wherever you chose to put it.
