TSR On the Relative Merits of the TSR Editions

[Zardnaar]

And I'm of the opinion that production quality, particular full color and art, have been over-emphasized more and more over the years, demanding higher prices from publishers, but no one listens to me.

Adjusted for inflation D&Ds cheaper now than 1996. PHB to phb.

Real terms (minimum wage increases, real wages, earning power, exoenses) its a lot cheaper. At the most basic level assuming you have time/can find a game.

Can be expensive or if you dont have money to begin with (translation if you dont own a house, bills to pay etc).

Varies by country.

For the most part its still a middle class/upper middle class hobby imho.

 

[Tesral]

In terms of purchasing power, that $10.95 in 1977 was equivalent to $60.00 in 2026, so the price of D&D hasn't kept up with inflation. I'm of the school of thought that gaming continues to be a relatively inexpensive hobby and the production quality has continued to go up.

I had a lot more 10 bucks then than I do 60 bucks now.

As to production quality the art has gotten better, the book quality has not. Those old 1e books have been beaten to DEATH! They have not lost pages, the ink does not smear, and the spines have not broken. I cannot say the same for more recent editions.

As to the quality of play for the price? Damn straight. Once you have the game you have a life time of enjoyment. Frankly more money spent is not really required. You can play forever on the core rules and your imagination.

 

[...m...]

As to production quality the art has gotten better, the book quality has not. Those old 1e books have been beaten to DEATH! They have not lost pages, the ink does not smear, and the spines have not broken. I cannot say the same for more recent editions.

...i will speculate that you skipped the AD+D 1.5 orange-spine era...

 

[Micah Sweet]

...i will speculate that you skipped the AD+D 1.5 orange-spine era...

I have a lot of books from that era, and most of them are fine. One of my two copies of OA, less so.

 

[Tesral]

...i will speculate that you skipped the AD+D 1.5 orange-spine era...

Nope, that is when the quality slipped. I did not buy the core books again, but I do have plenty of the supplements. The core books came my way in various methods. Down in the spare book shelves.

 

[JML]

I had a lot more 10 bucks then than I do 60 bucks now.

As to production quality the art has gotten better, the book quality has not. Those old 1e books have been beaten to DEATH! They have not lost pages, the ink does not smear, and the spines have not broken. I cannot say the same for more recent editions.

As to the quality of play for the price? Damn straight. Once you have the game you have a life time of enjoyment. Frankly more money spent is not really required. You can play forever on the core rules and your imagination.

I know a lot of people whose Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures books have busted spines and pages splitting out. (I'm still amazed my UA is in one piece) And we definitely shouldn't talk about the 2E core books. I think the 5E stuff holds up very nicely in terms of quality and durability.

The argument of "all you need is the core rules and your imagination" is true of every edition of every game, and sort of irrelevant? Expecting a company whose business is publishing to only do the core books and stop is never going to happen, but it's also not germane to the merits of one edition or another.

I fundamentally disagree with the argument that rule books should be more utilitarian and functional, with less art, skipping full color, etc. The increased production values help grow the game and make it more inviting and accessible. Personally, I consider 5E to be the prettiest edition they've ever produced and I'd argue it's been good for the game as a whole.

 

[Parmandur]

I know a lot of people whose Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures books have busted spines and pages splitting out. (I'm still amazed my UA is in one piece) And we definitely shouldn't talk about the 2E core books. I think the 5E stuff holds up very nicely in terms of quality and durability.

The argument of "all you need is the core rules and your imagination" is true of every edition of every game, and sort of irrelevant? Expecting a company whose business is publishing to only do the core books and stop is never going to happen, but it's also not germane to the merits of one edition or another.

I fundamentally disagree with the argument that rule books should be more utilitarian and functional, with less art, skipping full color, etc. The increased production values help grow the game and make it more inviting and accessible. Personally, I consider 5E to be the prettiest edition they've ever produced and I'd argue it's been good for the game as a whole.

I'd argue that the 2024core books are the most utilitarian set of core D&D books, in addition to being pretty.

 

[Tesral]

I know a lot of people whose Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures books have busted spines and pages splitting out. (I'm still amazed my UA is in one piece) And we definitely shouldn't talk about the 2E core books. I think the 5E stuff holds up very nicely in terms of quality and durability.

Mine does not have issues, but again I am careful with my books.

I fundamentally disagree with the argument that rule books should be more utilitarian and functional, with less art, skipping full color, etc. The increased production values help grow the game and make it more inviting and accessible. Personally, I consider 5E to be the prettiest edition they've ever produced and I'd argue it's been good for the game as a whole.

Pretty should not come at the cost of lower quality. I like nice pictures too. I like my books not falling apart more.

What shocked me was the push back I got from those that bought Forry and had ink smear. I said take it back, faulty book. I got a lot of "How dare I dis Lizards of the Coast because we should not expect better." People defending the lack of quality control. The Ithilds ate their brain. I don't care it it is the latest game book or a novel, a book should hold together through normal use, content aside.


On that point Plazio made an error trying to stuff the whole thing in one volume. I know of no owner of Pathfinder that uses the book that has not had the spine break. It is too much book for the format. The kind of use game books get breaks them, it is endemic.

 

[nevin]

Adjusted for inflation D&Ds cheaper now than 1996. PHB to phb.

Real terms (minimum wage increases, real wages, earning power, exoenses) its a lot cheaper. At the most basic level assuming you have time/can find a game.

Can be expensive or if you dont have money to begin with (translation if you dont own a house, bills to pay etc).

Varies by country.

For the most part its still a middle class/upper middle class hobby imho.

Well in 1977 I bought my DMG for 20 dollars that would be 106 dollars in todays dollars. We are actually paying 1990 prices for books now if you adjust for inflation. That book in 1990 was about 30 dollars which would be 73 dollars.

But the problem with such a simple argument is 1. we had far less competition for dollars back then. For instance most people on the bottom half of the economy didn't have 2 to 4 streaming services they just got their TV over the air on antenna. People watched TV, read books, played games. Computers weren't in most households and most of the stuff you do on the internet didn't exist.

2. The median salary in 1970 was 9,400 dollars a year. That's 78,000 dollars in today's dollars year now. The median salary today is 45,000.

This creates the problem the game industry (and all entertainment and non essential spending) has with using inflation as a guide for price is that wages haven't kept pace with inflation since the mid to late 1970's and there are lot more competitors for people's extra dollars than back then. Thus the industry giving in and selling PDF's cheaper. It became a neccessity to survive not a choice.

I could easily make the logical argument that a 7.99 a month streaming service is the equivilant of 11 dollars back in 1970 and that if people would cancel 2 services they could afford a book a year or two pdf books a year. But how many people are going to give up a full year of streaming on two services to buy a game book? Especially one they can share with their DM? But then that was a problem back then as well.

 

[Parmandur]

Well in 1977 I bought my DMG for 20 dollars that would be 106 dollars in todays dollars. We are actually paying 1990 prices for books now if you adjust for inflation. That book in 1990 was about 30 dollars which would be 73 dollars.

But the problem with such a simple argument is 1. we had far less competition for dollars back then. For instance most people on the bottom half of the economy didn't have 2 to 4 streaming services they just got their TV over the air on antenna. People watched TV, read books, played games. Computers weren't in most households and most of the stuff you do on the internet didn't exist.

2. The median salary in 1970 was 9,400 dollars a year. That's 78,000 dollars in today's dollars year now. The median salary today is 45,000.

This creates the problem the game industry (and all entertainment and non essential spending) has with using inflation as a guide for price is that wages haven't kept pace with inflation since the mid to late 1970's and there are lot more competitors for people's extra dollars than back then. Thus the industry giving in and selling PDF's cheaper. It became a neccessity to survive not a choice.

I could easily make the logical argument that a 7.99 a month streaming service is the equivilant of 11 dollars back in 1970 and that if people would cancel 2 services they could afford a book a year or two pdf books a year. But how many people are going to give up a full year of streaming on two services to buy a game book? Especially one they can share with their DM? But then that was a problem back then as well.

While that is true, the stagnation of wages is not really the game companies issue: if they make the same product, and charge the adjusted same price...that is a broader issue than the publisher.