Re: Historical Sales Figures for D&D's Various Editions

Keith Davies wrote:
>
> That was something I *liked* about 2e -- one monster per ***
> (nominally). Also, that the *provided* them on pages like that. It
> made it really easy for me to carry just what I needed.

Yeah, it's a shame it was impossible to file the various MCs together.

> Also, this meant that the physical layout on the page was (or could
> be) the same all the time. The mechanical stuff mostly didn't split
> across pages, it was *way* easier to read and use[1] than the 1e and
> 3e layouts[2].
>
> [1] ... as much as 2e could be easier to use than 3e, at least. I'm
> talking layout, not rules
> [2] for stuff from WotC, at least. A number of other d20 publishers
> have been putting out monster books with each monster starting on
> a new page. *Way* easier to use than WotC's layout.

Well, as of the last monster supplement Wizards of the Coast published, Monster
Manual III, each creature entry begins at the top of a new page. So I guess
they've caught up to the industry standard your approve of. ;)

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia

SERENITY - The Future Is Worth Fighting For

http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigeclasslist.html
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatelist.html


.