Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 5693188" data-attributes="member: 2205">That's a good point, but that doesn't mean that WotC could have done so.  As I stated earlier, Dancey was sufficiently vocal about the notion that adventures had slim profit margins, so they were better made by lean and mean third party "garage band" publishers.Plus, are you suggesting that buyers don't get saturated on adventures too?  When you've got more than twice what you can ever concievably run in your lifetime, which I have because I inherited a big pile of 3E Dungeon Magazines (that I wouldn't ever have bought on my own) do you not stop buying?  I picked up a few of the Paizo ones, just because they were the New Hotness with cool cover art and all, but do I really need an unending stream of adventure path chapters once a month and a few other standalones each month too?  I'm "full up" on modules for the foreseeable future.  Meanwhile, the right splat would still catch my eye.  And heck, Paizo still produces as much setting splat stuff as they do modules even now.  Yeah, whoops.  I googled and posted the link before I re-read it to make sure I remembered that it supported my argument.I still think that Marshall fails to address a pretty significant point, though--it took quite a while before 3.5 started charting new territory in the splatbook field.  They spent a much longer time reprinting and bulking up splatbooks that were out during the 3e run.  Sword & Fist became Complete Warrior, for example.  Tome & Blood became Complete Arcane.  New monster books; well there were always new monster books.  There were three before the edition change--Monster Manual, MM2 and Fiend Folio.While his story makes a certain amount of sense intuitively, I'm not sure that the product release schedule for the first two or three years of 3.5 necessarily supports it.</blockquote>

Verification