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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Glyfair" data-source="post: 1729616" data-attributes="member: 53">Actually, it's not "all of a sudden."  WotC has always seen the need for them.  However, they were hoping the d20 market would deal with that because they didn't sell well at all.Actually, "back in the day" there weren't any widely available campaign worlds (indeed, I think only Judges Guild had any for D&D).  Greyhawk took quite a while to see the light of day. You might have a point about them being mostly similiar, though.  Early D&D worlds were built around assumptions about the world from the game.One thing I noticed is a drift in the thread from the original comments.  The first post talked about using adventures to drive sales of sourcebooks.  All the examples of anything close to resembling a success of this theory has been an adventure tied to a campaign world.What I personally would and would't buy:I might buy an adventure that was "generic" and had good buzz (or was by a publisher with a stellar track record on quality).I would consider buying  an adventure tied into a campaign world that either I used or I knew was similiar to the campaign world I used (9 out of 10 times, my own).I would consider buying an adventure tied to a sourcebook (and advertised as such) if it was an important part of my campaign (for example, something specificly tied to the psionics handbook I would consider buying).I wouldn't buy an adventure that was advertised as being tied to a sourcebook I don't have.I wouldn't buy an adventure that included information from a sourcebook I don't own and didn't advertise it (unless they included all the information needed to use the information included in the adventure).That being said, it will have to be an exceptional adventure for me to buy it, unless it's tied to a setting I'm running.</blockquote>

Verification