Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Little Raven" data-source="post: 3878764" data-attributes="member: 10095">Read Ryan Dancey's account of the acquisition of TSR and his discussion of warehouses full of returned and unsold products from various campaign settings. It's pretty clear that attempting to support so many campaign settings diluted sales, especially among ones that were all just Western Fantasy carbon copies, as well as costing them huge amounts of money in printing and production (since they made more than just paperback books).They wouldn't have lost big dollars, because they wouldn't have spent so much on campaign settings that never made them any money. Again, read Dancey's account of the TSR acquisition, and note the part where he said that many of their products weren't even capable of breaking even (thus, they were just making new products that cost them money, even if they sold every copy).If Dark Sun, Planescape, or any of those others was as popular as you seem to think, then they'd have gotten licensed during 3e like Ravenloft and Dragonlance did. They didn't, because nobody in the position to do so thought they were worth the cost.Product glut is a sign of just attempting to make money, instead of producing a reasonable amount of quality products.If there was a viable market for them, they would. However, selling a redone version of an old campaign setting that wasn't very popular is not something on their agenda, unless they can see a huge amount of support in the form of sales, not forum posts.Andy Collin's Shadow of the Spider Moon is a great move in that direction.</blockquote>

Verification