darjr
I crit!
Ah. I didn’t realize. Thank you.These are not sales numbers. They are print runs. Some of those books could have been returned and refunded by had to be paid to the printer anyway. So a loss in revenue.
Ah. I didn’t realize. Thank you.These are not sales numbers. They are print runs. Some of those books could have been returned and refunded by had to be paid to the printer anyway. So a loss in revenue.
In the web page it says sales. Do you know if the catalog says prints? Or do you know that it’s supposed to be prints even if the catalog and the site say sales?These are not sales numbers. They are print runs. Some of those books could have been returned and refunded but still had to be paid to the printer. So a loss in revenue.
Well, they certainly didn't sell more Fiend Folios than they printed.These are not sales numbers. They are print runs. Some of those books could have been returned and refunded but still had to be paid to the printer. So a loss in revenue.
That's true, but the year-to-year numbers as new DMGs and new PHBs are being sold from 1979 until the fall off between 83 and 84 the MM is always below the two of them. You have folks getting the PHB, fewer folks getting the DMG, and then not all of those folks also picking up the MM.I'm almost certain that it did. Note that Ben's charts are missing 1977 and 1978 data (he specifically notes that on his FB post).
The first two years the original MM was out, in which every OD&D player who wanted a single-volume, clean and organized monster book would have been buying it, aren't included in these figures.
Thank you Captain Obvious I hadn't figured that out!Well, they certainly didn't sell more Fiend Folios than they printed.
Well, hey, just pointing out that the info is useful in showing the roof of a product: the Fiend Folio is a sharp decrease from the MM and MM2.Thank you Captain Obvious I hadn't figured that out!