Hardbounditis

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

As someone who still has a much-loved copy of the 1E Rogue's Gallery (love the PCs of EGG and other early developers), I prefer hardbacks. It pains me to see how ratty some of my supplements and adventures (like EX1 and 2 and UK1, for instance) have become.

Now, if it's a crap book, it's more annoying, but that's just an argument for getting a good look at the book and reading reputable reviewers' takes on the product beforehand.

 

[IronWolf]

I definitely prefer the hardbacks. As many have already said, they just hold up better in the gaming back. Every other week I toss all my books in an overloaded backpack and head off to the home of the person that hosts the game. The hardback books make the trip much better than my softcovers.

 

[Ghostwind]

Actually, one of the reasons you are seeing more hardcovers is because the price difference is not that much greater for publishers if they print a higher quantity (usually over 1500 copies) versus less than 1000 copies for perfect bound. Still it does represent a higher risk for a publisher to print hardcovers.

 

[Andre]

Just to be contrary: I don't really care, as long as the content is worth the price. I have a ton of good Hero System books that are softcover and they've held up fine. I also have quite a few WOTC hardcovers that have also held up fine - because I never look at them (PsiHB for example).

 

[JoeBlank]

I wonder if WoTC is engaging in a little marketing strategy, to distinguish themselves from the 3d party publishers. The 3.0 splat books from WoTC were all paperback, and many 3d party books looked much nicer. Since they can afford the risk of investing in hardcovers, WoTC has gone to a higher percentage of hardback books.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I buy books based primarily on content, be they hardcover, softcover or pdf. But a truly beautiful book can push me over the edge. Also, production value creates a sense that the publisher thinks a lot of the book, but I try to take into account that some publishers can not afford it. For example, the Heroes of High Favor series from Bad Axe was "pocket size", softcover, and black and white, but I liked them quite a bit. And now Bad Axe has built a reputation despite being a smaller publisher.

Another example is Bastion Press. I was a late comer to Oathbound. The hardcover campaign setting book looks great, and the first few full-color, softcover supplements look very nice too. Now their supplements are softcover, b&w, but I am sold and trust that the content will be worth my money.

 

[KB9JMQ]

I like hardcover because they seem to hold up better and they just feel like a book.

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

I buy based on content, but I'll confess to preferring hardbacks over softcovers. Softcover books get torn up too easily.

 

[Campbell]

An additional advantage of hardcovers is that they are much easier to distinguish from one another when they are sitting on your bookshelf. I happen to like that.

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

I like my novels in softcover and my RPG books in hardcover. Of course, it doesn't bother me THAT much.

 

[jsewell]

Though I don't consider hardback books to be sexy, they do withstand the wear and tear inherent to reference manuals. As for novels, trade paperbacks are my drug of choice. As far as cost goes, you can get just about any title released by WotC from Amazon.com for 19.77. Add a novel, and you're set with free shipping. (NOTE: I don't work for Amazon, it's just they are reliable, fast, and cheap.)