Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nivenus" data-source="post: 6397988" data-attributes="member: 71756">You have to take into account more than just the sales though. You also have to account for the costs of production. It seems to me that churning out book after book of splatbooks, one after the another, is a lot more expensive than producing a couple of thematic or setting books a year.Furthermore, there's also the possibility that too many books - as evidenced by 2e, 3e, and 4e - can have a burnout effect, where gamers gradually became less and less invested in an edition because of a preponderance of new rules and new material. I honestly think 4e's "must-buy" attitude towards not just the original core three books, but their second and third iterations, as well as the "Essentials" package, probably hurt it more than a little. It certainly didn't seem to help the brand.Based on the current approach of a slow reveal, it seems WotC may agree.I think I may be in the minority here but I don't think most classes need that many options. A lot end up being pretty redundant and fulfilling very similar options. What - for example - do you need a swashbuckler class for that a fighter/rogue multiclass with a few specific feats couldn't do? What purpose does separate barbarian and berserker kits (as existed in 2e) serve? At some point you're reinventing the wheel for the sake of selling more books.I agree that there's quite a lot of room for more subclass/background diversity in 5e as well as more feats or even a few extra classes. But I don't think we need the cascade of sourcebooks 2e and 3e had (or possibly even as many as 4e).</blockquote>

Verification