Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="humble minion" data-source="post: 9075008" data-attributes="member: 5948">Well, maybe.&nbsp; We do know there's a long development pipeline for WotC, if they make a change and it gets badly received, it's hard to wind that change back.&nbsp; This was discussed heavily in the wake of the poor reception of Spelljammer.&nbsp; I can't find the link, but I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere WotC saying in coded language that they heard the negative feedback on the slipcase format, but that Planescape was too far advanced in production and it was too late to make any changes there.Also, the real hybrid products, neither quite a setting book or a full-on adventure - are a relatively new thing.&nbsp; It really only started with Strixhaven - many setting books before that has a small adventure attached (which I personally don't like but I'm only one guy, and which i can live with anyway), but Strixhaven was a major change in direction.&nbsp; The most recent full-on hybrid product was Spelljammer, which was poorly received enough that it's one of the reasons Winniger left WotC, and Strixhaven was received in a fairly lukewarm manner too (except for Silvery Barbs...).&nbsp; So I'm not sure we can really say that the mingled product is 'working' for WotC at this point.&nbsp; With the caveat of course that only WotC sees the sales numbers etc so only they really know and we're only speculating.Regardless, I've got no problem with WotC selling adventures.&nbsp; I just wish they'd stop letting adventures parasitise setting books.&nbsp; Curse of Strahd and Shadow of the Dragon Queen I could deal with - they were adventures that just included the minimum setting material to make them work.&nbsp; Something like Spelljammer where I buy a product that claims to be a setting, but I have to comb through the monster book and the adventure to find bare scraps of setting material are just frustrating.&nbsp; Choose to write an adventure or a setting, don't mess about in the middle.In the context of the past decade or two, it isn't.&nbsp; Especially when it's a full-on multi-level campaign rather than just a module like so many of the back-in-the-day adventures were.&nbsp; A 2e product of compatible scope might be something like Night Below, which was three 64 page books in an era when stat blocks were much smaller.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="humble minion, post: 9075008, member: 5948"] Well, maybe. We do know there's a long development pipeline for WotC, if they make a change and it gets badly received, it's hard to wind that change back. This was discussed heavily in the wake of the poor reception of Spelljammer. I can't find the link, but I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere WotC saying in coded language that they heard the negative feedback on the slipcase format, but that Planescape was too far advanced in production and it was too late to make any changes there. Also, the real hybrid products, neither quite a setting book or a full-on adventure - are a relatively new thing. It really only started with Strixhaven - many setting books before that has a small adventure attached (which I personally don't like but I'm only one guy, and which i can live with anyway), but Strixhaven was a major change in direction. The most recent full-on hybrid product was Spelljammer, which was poorly received enough that it's one of the reasons Winniger left WotC, and Strixhaven was received in a fairly lukewarm manner too (except for Silvery Barbs...). So I'm not sure we can really say that the mingled product is 'working' for WotC at this point. With the caveat of course that only WotC sees the sales numbers etc so only they really know and we're only speculating. Regardless, I've got no problem with WotC selling adventures. I just wish they'd stop letting adventures parasitise setting books. Curse of Strahd and Shadow of the Dragon Queen I could deal with - they were adventures that just included the minimum setting material to make them work. Something like Spelljammer where I buy a product that claims to be a setting, but I have to comb through the monster book and the adventure to find bare scraps of setting material are just frustrating. Choose to write an adventure or a setting, don't mess about in the middle. In the context of the past decade or two, it isn't. Especially when it's a full-on multi-level campaign rather than just a module like so many of the back-in-the-day adventures were. A 2e product of compatible scope might be something like Night Below, which was three 64 page books in an era when stat blocks were much smaller. [/QUOTE]

Verification