D&D 5E With the release of each new setting book, the SCAG looks worse and worse...

[QuentinGeorge]

That's why I think a region guide approach would be better, it won't cannibalize ongoing SCAG sales and would continue expansion of the Realms. I don't agree with adventures being where they are doing this because 50 bucks for 3/4 of a book I may not use (i can only do so many adventures) in a Realms hopping campaign is a bit too much. I would even be happy if they took that content from the adventures and reprinted it as a book like they did some of the stuff that was put into Xanathar's Guide.

But that's the thing. They want you to buy that adventure book even if you only want it for the lore. That's the whole point.

 

[Parmandur]

But that's the thing. They want you to buy that adventure book even if you only want it for the lore. That's the whole point.

Precisely: it's been a winning strategy. And they have put out parts in a la carte formats sometimes, as well, such as the Enchiridion from Waterdeep.

 

[teitan]

Well, it is available in a hardcover book as well, one chock full of other material: there are over 20 low level dungeons detailed in Dragon Heist, including many with alternate keys for different scenarios. It's very inexpensive to procure, and not a PDF

Yes I am aware. I even mentioned it except it isn't Dragonheist, it's Dungeon of the Mad Mage. I am currently running it but for example, I have no interest in Tomb of Annihilation but the Chult material seems quite good and 50 bucks for 1/4 of the material in the book is not a wise or prudent investment. I already made these arguments in a previous post so I am now repeating myself to you. I don't buy pdfs, I'd love to see the setting material reprinted in a new book like how much of the class material were presented in Xanathar. I have no interest in Saltmarsh either but I shouldn't have to buy the book for the sea faring rules. It's irresponsible with money to pay 50 bucks for a book where I need what? 10 pages at most? That's not good use of my entertainment dollar or my D&D money. So instead of spitting out to me things I have already said are no gos for myself and many others, perhaps you should instead come up with valid reasons why we should spend 50 bucks a pop on 34 pages of setting material when 1: it has already been said PDF and POD are generally the end of the line for most casual gamers and 2: you would just be repeating yourself nd badgering about the presentation of the material that already has been voted down with reasons why it is voted down with the alternative option of reprinting the Volo's Enchiridion of Waterdeep and Baldur's Gate with the Chult material and a few other things and then continuing those regional supplements as IN PRINT products. It's a loss leader for WOTC as the adventures already sell well and for those who don't want to spend 50 on an adventure it gives them an alternative IN PRINT option that doesn't involve going to a third party site.

 

[teitan]

usually I agree with you but man, tonight you just seem to want to push some buttons so I won't be replying anymore.

 

[Parmandur]

Yes I am aware. I even mentioned it except it isn't Dragonheist, it's Dungeon of the Mad Mage. I am currently running it but for example, I have no interest in Tomb of Annihilation but the Chult material seems quite good and 50 bucks for 1/4 of the material in the book is not a wise or prudent investment. I already made these arguments in a previous post so I am now repeating myself to you. I don't buy pdfs, I'd love to see the setting material reprinted in a new book like how much of the class material were presented in Xanathar. I have no interest in Saltmarsh either but I shouldn't have to buy the book for the sea faring rules. It's irresponsible with money to pay 50 bucks for a book where I need what? 10 pages at most? That's not good use of my entertainment dollar or my D&D money. So instead of spitting out to me things I have already said are no gos for myself and many others, perhaps you should instead come up with valid reasons why we should spend 50 bucks a pop on 34 pages of setting material when 1: it has already been said PDF and POD are generally the end of the line for most casual gamers and 2: you would just be repeating yourself nd badgering about the presentation of the material that already has been voted down with reasons why it is voted down with the alternative option of reprinting the Volo's Enchiridion of Waterdeep and Baldur's Gate with the Chult material and a few other things and then continuing those regional supplements as IN PRINT products. It's a loss leader for WOTC as the adventures already sell well and for those who don't want to spend 50 on an adventure it gives them an alternative IN PRINT option that doesn't involve going to a third party site.

In terms of cost accounting, percentage of the book isn't relevant, hours of entertainment is what counts. A current D&D hardcover costs less than dinner and a movie around these parts (when theatres and restraunts are operational). It is therefore reasonable to spend less than the cost of dinner and a movie for about 4-6 hours of entertainment. A current D&D product has way more than 4-6 hours of entertainment value built in, and is therefore a reasonable investment of entertainment budget.

WotC has made their strategy of making books that portions will appeal to different markets: they are willing to put out something like the Waterdeep Enchiridion (which is indeed in Dragon Heist, not DotMM), but there is no value for them putting together a book that reduces the value of multiple other books. Nor should they. If the Chult material isn't worth a few bucks on Amazon to you, then it's not worth enough to justify reprinting while it is still in print.

 

[Parmandur]

usually I agree with you but man, tonight you just seem to want to push some buttons so I won't be replying anymore.

Well, I apologise for any issues if tone: the state of the world has me in a cranky pants mood.

Still, WotC strategy with regional setting material in Adventures is reasonable and consumer friendly. It is unlikely to shift anytime soon.

 

[teitan]

I agree it is a strategy that works but so is reprinting material that was once available through adventures and other sources ala Xanathar. I don’t plan to run anything in Chult. I am advocating for the Devil. Also I’m done with PDFs for reasons outlined above. Have a good day/night.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

Yes I am aware. I even mentioned it except it isn't Dragonheist, it's Dungeon of the Mad Mage. I am currently running it but for example, I have no interest in Tomb of Annihilation but the Chult material seems quite good and 50 bucks for 1/4 of the material in the book is not a wise or prudent investment. I already made these arguments in a previous post so I am now repeating myself to you. I don't buy pdfs, I'd love to see the setting material reprinted in a new book like how much of the class material were presented in Xanathar. I have no interest in Saltmarsh either but I shouldn't have to buy the book for the sea faring rules. It's irresponsible with money to pay 50 bucks for a book where I need what? 10 pages at most? That's not good use of my entertainment dollar or my D&D money. So instead of spitting out to me things I have already said are no gos for myself and many others, perhaps you should instead come up with valid reasons why we should spend 50 bucks a pop on 34 pages of setting material when 1: it has already been said PDF and POD are generally the end of the line for most casual gamers and 2: you would just be repeating yourself nd badgering about the presentation of the material that already has been voted down with reasons why it is voted down with the alternative option of reprinting the Volo's Enchiridion of Waterdeep and Baldur's Gate with the Chult material and a few other things and then continuing those regional supplements as IN PRINT products. It's a loss leader for WOTC as the adventures already sell well and for those who don't want to spend 50 on an adventure it gives them an alternative IN PRINT option that doesn't involve going to a third party site.

If it made financial sense to do any of that, they would do it. The fact they aren't suggests the opposite.

 

[BrokenTwin]

In terms of cost accounting, percentage of the book isn't relevant, hours of entertainment is what counts. A current D&D hardcover costs less than dinner and a movie around these parts (when theatres and restraunts are operational). It is therefore reasonable to spend less than the cost of dinner and a movie for about 4-6 hours of entertainment. A current D&D product has way more than 4-6 hours of entertainment value built in, and is therefore a reasonable investment of entertainment budget.

While I agree with this argument, I do want to note that the comparison shouldn't be a dinner and a movie, but other products that accomplish similar things. In this case, other RPG systems and books. And in that comparison, I can understand why some people feel that WotC's offerings are near exploitive. For most toolkit systems, there's usually more, smaller options that flesh out different areas of mechanics, so the consumer can more buy only what's directly relevant to themselves.

Having said THAT, I also understand why WotC does things the way they do. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

 

[gyor]

I did not know it was made by a 3rd party. That suggests that even back then WotC staffers had no interest in rewriting a FR setting book.

Which is not to say they didn't like the setting - they are quite happy to set most of their adventures there.

And they are happy to endorse what others do with the setting.

I don't dislike FR. I use it for most of my adventures myself. And the reason I do that is there is a vast amount of setting material already available, much of it free.

What I do dislike is rewriting things that have already been written. I'm a creative person and I like to be creative. I don't think I'm unreasonable in projecting that onto WotC writers, especially given the data we have by looking at their output.

No it suggests they had a smaller staff and that they were focusing their core staff on the core three books while the SCAG was being written, same with how it was actually another company that wrote Tyranny of Dragons. Writing on both books I believe actually started before the writing of the core books was finished, hence mechanical issues in both.