Vaalingrade
Legend
At the very least, Enworld is full of comments from people talking about how they bought books for the reading and never playing them.
Because if they want to keep using a fairly generic base for new Campaigns, the Inner Sea opens up a lot more space (they don't generally seemed inclined to revisit the same area too often without a metaplot). Besides, Perkins has spoken about transitioning away from the Sword Coast into other parts of Faerun, specifically Coromyr, in a way that suggested that is where they are headed over time.I don't see any reason to do so long as it's generic fantasyland adventure. Being well known, with lots of content, movies and video games is a huge advantage.
It's only when the adventure does not have a generic fantasy setting that they use other parts of the FR, as they do in Radiant Citadel for example.
It was ever thus with RPGs, too. Loads of people buy adventures or setting books they're never actually going to run, often with no serious intention of using, sometimes without even having a group.At the very least, Enworld is full of comments from people talking about how they bought books for the reading and never playing them.
Sure, but TSR still got my money, and I still enjoyed those books. What does it matter how I use them?It was ever thus with RPGs, too. Loads of people buy adventures or setting books they're never actually going to run, often with no serious intention of using, sometimes without even having a group.
Novels, yes. Reference books, no. Who wants to faff about with an index when you can just tell your phone what you want to know?
I dare say in TSR days the readers might have outnumbered the players.It was ever thus with RPGs, too. Loads of people buy adventures or setting books they're never actually going to run, often with no serious intention of using, sometimes without even having a group.
Exactly.Sure, but TSR still got my money, and I still enjoyed those books. What does it matter how I use them?
I'm not really saying it's necessarily a problem, but it's certainly A Thing.Sure, but TSR still got my money, and I still enjoyed those books. What does it matter how I use them?
The balance between reading and playing was perfect for me in the 2e era, especially with Dragon Magazine. I've dearly missed that time ever since.I'm not really saying it's necessarily a problem, but it's certainly A Thing.
It can become a problem when a company stops designing books to be primarily useful for their actual stated role and instead starts writing them primarily for reading (that never really happened in the TSR era to be fair).
(hesitantly raises hand and says quietly) and at least one person who buys books and doesn't/hasn't yet read themAt the very least, Enworld is full of comments from people talking about how they bought books for the reading and never playing them.
Probably correct. It's the "player " market that has seen massive growth.I dare say in TSR days the readers might have outnumbered the players.
Has it though, I look at all the D&DBeyond characters who are never used in a campaign, the online theory-crafting and elaborate backgrounds, the campaign settings carefully crafted and wonder....how much of these people are playing, as opposed to, I guess, "playing at playing."Probably correct. It's the "player " market that has seen massive growth.
And the fact that D&D is now owned by Hasbro is part of the reason. It's not that there is no market for "readers", it's that a toy and game company isn't particularly interested in pursuing it (and when they do it's aimed at children). There is an old adage in business that you should stick to what you know, and avoid overdiversification.
These are things that key off rules though. And therefore in Hasbro's wheelhouse.Has it though, I look at all the D&DBeyond characters who are never used in a campaign, the online theory-crafting and elaborate backgrounds, the campaign settings carefully crafted and wonder....how much of these people are playing, as opposed to, I guess, "playing at playing."
They still do make setting books. But they are setting books to support play, not to be read.You do realize that Hasbro owned D&D during two editions that did have actual setting books, right?
Those aren't setting books. They're adventures with player options and a little background attached. What setting they have is designed to support the included adventure, not creating adventures in the setting the book is ostensibly about.They still do make setting books. But they are setting books to support play, not to be read.
Playsets.Those aren't setting books. They're adventures with player options and a little background attached. What setting they have is designed to support the included adventure, not creating adventures in the setting the book is ostensibly about.
Because if they want to keep using a fairly generic base for new Campaigns, the Inner Sea opens up a lot more space (they don't generally seemed inclined to revisit the same area too often without a metaplot). Besides, Perkins has spoken about transitioning away from the Sword Coast into other parts of Faerun, specifically Coromyr, in a way that suggested that is where they are headed over time.
The Dalelanda also share the Sword Coast's advantage of being the location of Greenwood's actual home games, and hence actually interesting detail.
They have what you need to play D&D. They do not have the reams of irrelevant and repetitive information that used to be in setting books because you do not need that to play D&D. It only existed to be read.Those aren't setting books. They're adventures with player options and a little background attached. What setting they have is designed to support the included adventure, not creating adventures in the setting the book is ostensibly about.