Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Urriak Uruk" data-source="post: 8170797" data-attributes="member: 7015558">So I won't deny you're not alone (like I said before, Tasha's/Xanathar's are likely the best selling non-core books) but this is also the best selling edition of D&amp;D, of all time, by a lot. Maybe that's a case of correlation and not causation, but it stands to reason that part of the reason the crunch books sell so well, is because they are so rare? And if we got a new entirely-crunch book every year, would they outperform the adventure books in sales, or the setting books?IMO, I doubt it. Looking at previous editions, the more books that are released in a fast pace, the less sales each book will get (which makes sense, as the more books there are the less likely people are going to try and buy every book). I find it doubtful that pumping out a new Tasha's/Xan every year will mean they all are as successful as those two books, especially as the quality of those rules will likely decline as they are forced to include sub-par options in order to fill the annual crunch book (which in turn will lead to the game's rules becoming more cluttered, janky, and unsuccessful).And I can't take your &quot;moving the game forward&quot; critique too seriously, mostly because I know you aren't using the numerous rules included in setting books and adventures. If you're only going to use Tasha's/Xanathar's, which are mostly player's options, then yeah you're not getting a lot of content. But that's your choice, so I would blame WotC release strategy of having balanced books instead of seperating them into &quot;crunch only&quot; or &quot;fluff only.&quot; Productivity seems largely irrelevant here; it's your preferences not aligning with the book's format.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Urriak Uruk, post: 8170797, member: 7015558"] So I won't deny you're not alone (like I said before, Tasha's/Xanathar's are likely the best selling non-core books) but this is also the best selling edition of D&D, of all time, by a lot. Maybe that's a case of correlation and not causation, but it stands to reason that part of the reason the crunch books sell so well, is because they are so rare? And if we got a new entirely-crunch book every year, would they outperform the adventure books in sales, or the setting books? IMO, I doubt it. Looking at previous editions, the more books that are released in a fast pace, the less sales each book will get (which makes sense, as the more books there are the less likely people are going to try and buy every book). I find it doubtful that pumping out a new Tasha's/Xan every year will mean they all are as successful as those two books, especially as the quality of those rules will likely decline as they are forced to include sub-par options in order to fill the annual crunch book (which in turn will lead to the game's rules becoming more cluttered, janky, and unsuccessful). And I can't take your "moving the game forward" critique too seriously, mostly because I know you aren't using the numerous rules included in setting books and adventures. If you're only going to use Tasha's/Xanathar's, which are mostly player's options, then yeah you're not getting a lot of content. But that's your choice, so I would blame WotC release strategy of having balanced books instead of seperating them into "crunch only" or "fluff only." Productivity seems largely irrelevant here; it's your preferences not aligning with the book's format. [/QUOTE]

Verification