D&D General When the fiction doesn't match the mechanics

[Bigsta]

I find the 5e makes perfect sense if you just assume its running on Soulcalibur physics.

 

[Hussar]

I'm not asking you to be sad. I'm asking for you to not be explicitly happy about the misfortune of others.

Yeah, I'm still irritated about that.

Misery? That’s a bit strong don’t you think? You’ve spent years taking big steaming dumps on everything WotC has done. You’ve certainly not been shy in your criticism.

Otoh, I’m pretty happy with the state of things and, the truth is, WotC actually is supporting everyone. If you want setting books, there they are. If you want lore books? Yup right there. If you want player options? Done and done. And if you want adventures and canned campaigns? Got that too.

So yeah, considering you want to return to the way it used to be with you getting everything you want, and me getting scraps, yeah, I’m pretty happy you’re not getting what you want.

 

[Voadam]

Except that the primary selling point is the Adventure Paths. The Campaign Setting sourcebooks are there, sure, but, again, nicely balanced - 50:50.

So 50:50 does not to support "The majority of players don’t care and don’t want setting books."

And, remember, you get those sourcebooks when you subscribe to the Adventure Path.

No, you don't the 103 campaign setting sourcebooks were separate. It was a whole separate subscription. Just like the individual Adventure subscription, the player companion subscription, the rulebook subscription, and the map subscription were separate.

I'm not sure you can get them on their own.

If you are talking about the sourcebooks, yes you can. If you are talking about the lore sections of the AP, some showed up in later sourcebooks, some did not.

They weren't marketed that way. But, the point is, it's still 50:50. Unlike the pre-5e days when it was about 90% sourcebooks and player option books and about 10% adventures.

I think your pre-5e numbers are wildly out of wack.

What do you think was the most sourcebook to module setting/edition?

 

[Hussar]

So 50:50 does not to support "The majority of players don’t care and don’t want setting books."

No, you don't the 103 campaign setting sourcebooks were separate. It was a whole separate subscription. Just like the individual Adventure subscription, the player companion subscription, the rulebook subscription, and the map subscription were separate.

If you are talking about the sourcebooks, yes you can. If you are talking about the lore sections of the AP, some showed up in later sourcebooks, some did not.

I think your pre-5e numbers are wildly out of wack.

What do you think was the most sourcebook to module setting/edition?

2e without a doubt. That’s not really in question is it? But even 3e and 4e were far thinner in the ground for adventures.

I suppose a lot of it depends on how you see Dungeon magazine as well. But, let’s be honest here, it’s not been until 5e that we see anything close to 50:50.

And I get that people like reading source books. I understand that. That’s obviously true. But until now, the choice was buy sourcebooks or go 3pp.

It’s nice to have support in the hobby for a change.

 

[Cadence]

What do you think was the most sourcebook to module setting/edition?

Edit: @Hussar beat me to it

I'm not sure what exactly makes a sourcebook, but it feels like 2e had a lot with the historical ones, race ones, and monster by campaign ones

List of Dungeons & Dragons rulebooks - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Micah Sweet]

Misery? That’s a bit strong don’t you think? You’ve spent years taking big steaming dumps on everything WotC has done. You’ve certainly not been shy in your criticism.

Otoh, I’m pretty happy with the state of things and, the truth is, WotC actually is supporting everyone. If you want setting books, there they are. If you want lore books? Yup right there. If you want player options? Done and done. And if you want adventures and canned campaigns? Got that too.

So yeah, considering you want to return to the way it used to be with you getting everything you want, and me getting scraps, yeah, I’m pretty happy you’re not getting what you want.

I never said misery. And doubling down on schadenfreude isn't a great look.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Edit: @Hussar beat me to it

I'm not sure what exactly makes a sourcebook, but it feels like 2e had a lot with the historical ones, race ones, and monster by campaign ones

List of Dungeons & Dragons rulebooks - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Unsurprisingly, 2e was my favorite edition and the one I bought the most. It was D&D to me. Dumping and/or twisting it beyond recognition felt and still feels quite personal, despite my knowing that's not true.

 

[Hussar]

I never said misery. And doubling down on schadenfreude isn't a great look.

My bad. Reading fail. Read misfortune as misery.

 

[billd91]

But do you think this is typical?

I’m thinking not.

The continued, sustained popularity of these modules seems to point to the notion that they are actually getting played. The hundreds of Dms Guild add ons for them as well. The fact that there are Patreons devoted to supporting aps seems to point in the direction that they are actually being played.

Whether it’s typical for some to have several AP volumes and never have run any of them? Maybe not. But for some to have a number of APs and have run only a minority of them? Oh, yeah, that’s common. If you subscribed to the monthly APs from Paizo, you got 3-4 APs in the time it often takes a group to run one to completion. So yeah, they’re being bought to be read (with the potential for being run) a lot. Paizo knows this which is why, in part, they were written the way they were, and with so much setting material. They knew that if you weren’t gonna run that issue, they could still make it worth your while with setting material.

 

[Voadam]

2e without a doubt. That’s not really in question is it? But even 3e and 4e were far thinner in the ground for adventures.

I suppose a lot of it depends on how you see Dungeon magazine as well. But, let’s be honest here, it’s not been until 5e that we see anything close to 50:50.

And I get that people like reading source books. I understand that. That’s obviously true. But until now, the choice was buy sourcebooks or go 3pp.

It’s nice to have support in the hobby for a change.

2e has tons of sourcebooks. It also undeniably has tons of adventures though.

To say that 2e lacked adventure module support, even not counting the monthly multiple adventures from Dungeon magazines, would be fairly preposterous in my opinion.

Going to the current first page of the Drivethru 2e D&D page, I count 17 individual modules of the fist 50 PDFs.

A Paladin in Hell, Adam's Wrath, Against the Giants, Golden Voyages, A Dozen and One Adventures, Axe of the Dwarven Lords, Castle Spulzeer, Chilling Tales, Circle of Darkness, Dead Gods, Death Ascendent, Death Unchained, Dragon Knight, Dragon's Rest, Dragonlance Classics Vol II, Dragonlance Classics Vol III, Dragon Magic.

That is not counting stuff like the Children of the Night villain sourcebooks which each have mini adventures for each detailed villain or stuff like the 64 page adventure book in the City by the Silt Sea Dark Sun setting product.

Sure that is not 50/50, it is 1 out of 3, but that is not nearly 1 out of 10 being modules. And what is there is a ton of module support for DMs to run multiple campaigns using nothing but modules.

I mostly ran modules and never ran out of stuff to run for my AD&D Greyhawk and Ravenloft campaigns and had plenty of modules for both settings that I have not run and had modules ready to go for plot hooks that the parties did not bite on.

Birthright was probably the 2e setting with the lowest proportion of modules to products that I can think of. It stands out as an outlier in 2e though.