Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 937592" data-attributes="member: 151">Something else to consider:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The first printing of D&amp;D 3.0 was full of typos, editing mistakes and rules errors.&nbsp; </li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">All of the first edition books were sold at a loss.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">The number of people purchasing 3.5 will not be the same as the number that purchased 3.0.</li>
</ul>In other words, there are NEW costs associated with this edition.&nbsp; The first printing (and yes, even the second) were rife with poor editing, by most accounts.&nbsp; Even a single word change can have a ripple effect throughout the entire manuscript.&nbsp; It must be edited and proofread over and over.&nbsp; Doubly so, this time, due to the rules changes.&nbsp; This edition will clearly not be as widely adopted as the first release of 3.0.&nbsp; Fewer marketing dollars are being spent to promote it; fewer people are out there to sell it; with a poorer economy, fewer people are going to be inclined to buy it.&nbsp; It is a new revision, and some folks will not want to spend the money for it, especially if they can get it for free.&nbsp; Sales of the first printing did exceed expectations...but they didn't turn much of a profit on them, regardless, if I recall Ryan Dancey's comments correctly.&nbsp; Essentially, the initial printing of the core was designed to get the product out there, which would encourage d20 sales, which would, in turn, drive core book sales....which, by that time would be more expensive.&nbsp; The OGL would flood the market with materials, further dominating the market, keeping the brand alive.And, as Tom points out, they never said it was going to be anything BUT a revision.&nbsp; I mean, really.&nbsp; I think some folks may just be looking for stuff to complain about.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes&nbsp; &nbsp; :rolleyes:"&nbsp; data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="WizarDru, post: 937592, member: 151"] Something else to consider: [list] [*]The first printing of D&D 3.0 was full of typos, editing mistakes and rules errors. [*]All of the first edition books were sold at a loss. [*]The number of people purchasing 3.5 will not be the same as the number that purchased 3.0. [/list] In other words, there are NEW costs associated with this edition. The first printing (and yes, even the second) were rife with poor editing, by most accounts. Even a single word change can have a ripple effect throughout the entire manuscript. It must be edited and proofread over and over. Doubly so, this time, due to the rules changes. This edition will clearly not be as widely adopted as the first release of 3.0. Fewer marketing dollars are being spent to promote it; fewer people are out there to sell it; with a poorer economy, fewer people are going to be inclined to buy it. It is a new revision, and some folks will not want to spend the money for it, especially if they can get it for free. Sales of the first printing did exceed expectations...but they didn't turn much of a profit on them, regardless, if I recall Ryan Dancey's comments correctly. Essentially, the initial printing of the core was designed to get the product out there, which would encourage d20 sales, which would, in turn, drive core book sales....which, by that time would be more expensive. The OGL would flood the market with materials, further dominating the market, keeping the brand alive. And, as Tom points out, they never said it was going to be anything BUT a revision. I mean, really. I think some folks may just be looking for stuff to complain about.:rolleyes: [/QUOTE]

Verification