Dark Side Sourcebook

[Henry]

JEEZ! My local BAMM in the nearby town has at least one copy of each of those. I need to make a trip for an "investment." Some sucker desparate gamer is willing to pay 2 grand for one of those?

 

[pawsplay]

Im not sure what's unethical about providing people with a book for 20-30 dollars they were buying for five TIMES that amount.

Sounds to me like WOTC is looking to turn a profit while also helping their customers out. Seems like good business to me.

Chuck

Ok, I take it back. I had no idea there was that kind of demand for it.

 

[Ranger REG]

JEEZ! My local BAMM in the nearby town has at least one copy of each of those. I need to make a trip for an "investment." Some sucker desparate gamer is willing to pay 2 grand for one of those?

If that's the only avenue they have, without resorting to less-than-honorable pursuits... *shrugs*

I blame the Antique Roadshow.

 

[Remus Lupin]

"ethical"? It's a business, supply and demand. When copies of the DSSB are going for well over $100 on eBay, even knowing fully that it's not for the current version of the rules, demand says it's the right thing to do.

The professor of business ethics weeps!

Leaving aside wingandsword's comment (still weeping!), I nevertheless don't think it's unethical. The book is what it is, and as long as the consumer buys it understanding what it is supposed to be, Wizards doesn't have an ethical obligation to update it.

NOW, if Wizards were to market the book as "New and Improved" and then reprint the exact same material, that WOULD be unethical. Similarly, if they didn't actually come out and SAY that there was new material, but strongly IMPLIED that there was, that would also be unethical. But simply reprinting the book. Nah, that's not unethical, much as I might wish the WOULD in fact update it.

Scott

 

[WayneLigon]

It is kind of bizarre to reprint these books now, when a new incompatable version of the game is coming out in March. I guess they want to take advantage of the high demand while they can? I sold mine quite some time ago for about $50.00.

 

[Crothian]

It is kind of bizarre to reprint these books now, when a new incompatable version of the game is coming out in March.

We know it will be incompatable? I've read some changes but nothing that makes me thing I can't alter these older books the same way.

 

[JPL]

We know it will be incompatable? I've read some changes but nothing that makes me thing I can't alter these older books the same way.

Well, "incompatable" is a matter of degrees in this instance. It will probably require the same amount of rejiggering one would expect if using a 3.0 product in a 3.5, I would guess.

 

[Ibram]

I'm glad they reprinted it... I've been looking for a copy for the last year or so (after I read a buds). Its one of the better WotC books produced, and the section about the path to the dark side is far superior to anything found in the BoVD. Though I dont own any other Star Wars books I do use it as a general game refrence.

 

[Turjan]

It is kind of bizarre to reprint these books now, when a new incompatable version of the game is coming out in March. I guess they want to take advantage of the high demand while they can? I sold mine quite some time ago for about $50.00.

Why don't you just say that they want to satisfy the high demand and listen to the many people who practically begged them to reprint these books, because they were only available for ridiculous prices?

And the new version of the SW RPG has been officially announced. All facts are in the open. It's everyone's own decision if they want to buy the book now or not.

 

[starwed]

Not that ethics has to do with this case, they stated publicly they're reprinting the book. They didn't say about revising it.

That's fine, but errata should be corrected in reprintings of a book, or at least included as an errata sheet. While the internet alleviates this problem a little bit, it does seem cheap to not include some form of errata in a reprinting.