Greg K said:
Could it be the quality and approach of WOTC's supplements in general be the reason that are not getting my money? That's not to say that they didn't have some stuff that I found really worthwhile (e.g., Unearthed Arcana, Fiendish Codex I, Lords of Madness, Heroes of Horror, Stormwrack) , but, with most of their supplements, I am lucky to find 5-10 pages of material that I found to be worthwhile. The same generally holds true for their d20 Modern stuff. So, I give my money to the companies putting out the stuff I do like and, imo, improve the game for me- Adamant, Green Ronin, RPGObjects and the occassional product from other companies like EN Publishing (the Elements of Magic line), Malhavoc (Book of Iron Might), Mystic Eye Games (Artificer's Handbook).
4e is just picking up with WOTC providing more of the types of mechanics that I don't like with a couple of decent bits (e.g., making (most) non-biological racial abilities into feats, more hp to start, and to a degree the mutliclassing rules).
Oh, I agree completely. There are more than a few splatbooks sitting on my shelf that have hardly even had the binding cracked and by no means is it your 'duty' to buy crappy splatbooks for some mythical good of the hobby. It's an industry wide problem however, not confined to D&D. There is a running joke among Shadowrun players for example that any time a Rigger book is released the next edition is almost ready to be announced. Shadowrun is actually quite interesting, because it follows a very predictable product cycle between editions.
The exact order will shift a little bit but you can be pretty sure it will follow this format pretty close. First there is an expansion of the magic rules, a book on Seattle, then a book that advances the metaplot, a book for gunbunnies, a book of Cyberware, a book for deckers/hackers, a book that allows increased character options for everyone, a GM handbook, a rigger book, another plot book, and finally a new edition.
You will get additional setting books scattered throughout the cycle, but these typically focus on individual locations and are relatively edition neutral but basically that's it. That's the development cycle that Shadowrun has followed over 4 editions and 20 years, and you know what, it works. Admittedly on a smaller scale than Wizards (Catalyst has 4 full time employees) but it does work.
I think (hope) Wizards might be trying to mirror a similar development cycle, with a concrete list of what does/doesn't need to be fleshed out already outlined and a plan for how do accomplish this. This would cut down on splatbook bloat, ensure that the books that they are releasing have a specific focus designed towards specific playstyles. It's cool to still have more esoteric books like the Fiendish Codex's and Stormwrack but they are going to appeal to a very specific subset within the D&D community, those that like Demons and those that like water adventures respectively. By releasing a few of those books per edition cycle and keeping them (relatively) edition neutral, expanding rather than contracting options while maintaining a sense of consistency devs can create a sense of continuity for old gamers while keeping things fresh for a new audience.
Dante's Inferno for example, always has been and probably always will be, the hottest runner bar in Seattle, but it has changed throughout editions though it is generally just a small writeup in a larger book. Likewise D&D probably doesn't need a new demon/devil book this edition. They can put their focus somewhere else and if they release OOP books as inexpensive PDF's it will still allow new DM's who want to include Demons and Devils to buy the old edition supplement and convert the fluff at least to their new edition campaign.
