Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AlioTheFool" data-source="post: 5430225" data-attributes="member: 82767">Rather than write out a whole new post, I'll just re-post what I wrote in the official DDM WotC forum:Non-random doesn't work as a business model. It drives me insane that&nbsp; years later people are still stuck on the &quot;I'd pay xx dollars for a pack of monsters that I want.&quot; That's exactly why Wizards&nbsp; couldn't do it. You'd buy one, maybe two, packs of kobolds, or&nbsp; skeletons, or whatever and then you'd never buy another pack of that&nbsp; monster type. Random, or at least semi-random was the only way to go.What I think WotC should have&nbsp; done, however, is move toward a &quot;best of both worlds&quot; scenario.&nbsp; Rather&nbsp; than the visible model they went with, they should have created packs&nbsp; with multiple common-level visibles, with uncommon and rares hidden&nbsp; inside. For example, a package with one goblin, one hobgoblin, and one&nbsp; bugbear visible, all common or uncommon quality. Put a rare/very rare or&nbsp; two and uncommons hidden in the box.Then people know that if&nbsp; they buy 4 packs of those, they'll have a fair sized encounter group of&nbsp; low level monsters. In addition, they'd be getting the pieces in the box&nbsp; that you only need a small number of, such as a blue dragon or balor&nbsp; demon.The problem with the visibles they went with was that&nbsp; people only needed a small handful of them. How many huge green dragons&nbsp; or beholders do I really need? If those had been, say, different models&nbsp; of skeletons, I'd have an incentive to buy more packs of them. If they&nbsp; were common/uncommon level monsters that people can use bunches of,&nbsp; there's no reason to not buy more. I couldn't justify buying more packs of the green dragon after I had already bought three.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AlioTheFool, post: 5430225, member: 82767"] Rather than write out a whole new post, I'll just re-post what I wrote in the official DDM WotC forum: Non-random doesn't work as a business model. It drives me insane that years later people are still stuck on the "I'd pay xx dollars for [I]a [/I]pack of monsters that I want." That's exactly [I]why [/I]Wizards couldn't do it. You'd buy one, maybe two, packs of kobolds, or skeletons, or whatever and then you'd never buy another pack of that monster type. Random, or at least semi-random was the only way to go. What I think WotC [I]should [/I]have done, however, is move toward a "best of both worlds" scenario. Rather than the visible model they went with, they should have created packs with multiple common-level visibles, with uncommon and rares hidden inside. For example, a package with one goblin, one hobgoblin, and one bugbear visible, all common or uncommon quality. Put a rare/very rare or two and uncommons hidden in the box. Then people know that if they buy 4 packs of those, they'll have a fair sized encounter group of low level monsters. In addition, they'd be getting the pieces in the box that you only need a small number of, such as a blue dragon or balor demon. The problem with the visibles they went with was that people only needed a small handful of them. How many huge green dragons or beholders do I really need? If those had been, say, different models of skeletons, I'd have an incentive to buy more packs of them. If they were common/uncommon level monsters that people can use bunches of, there's no reason to [I]not [/I]buy more. I couldn't justify buying more packs of the green dragon after I had already bought three. [/QUOTE]

Verification