General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
This. My phone won't give you xp so I will have to owe you until I get home from the hospital.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
Between the thread title and this question, you seem to be wording this in a way that you're implying two specific answers:
1. WotC gets steamrolled by an upstart OGL game and gets the black eye they deserve
2. Or WotC takes the role of the big bad corporation and uses its corporation powers to destroy the poor little upstart, showing us all how evil they really are
Both of those seem like pipe dreams. The most likely occurence, which your wording kind of skirts, is that WotC will do absolutely nothing because they aren't really threatened.
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
Not really. Check the last post in the previous page. No need to derail this to anti-Wotc, pro-Wotc debate just because. Please try to avoid this.
In response to this, I have to ask if the OP wasn't meant as a anti-WotC leading question? If it wasn't, I really didn't understand what you were getting at.
1. Do nothing
2. Try to take ideas for the current edition if possible
3. Try to design the next edition on (the ideas of) the new revolutionary design
4. Turn the next edition to OGL and develop on that design
5. Hire the person that did this to work on the development of the next edition
6. Something else, explain.
Mr. Piratecat is this possible? I mean, can I transform the thread in a poll?
You know those math problems in school that were "trick questions" designed to be answered with D: Not Enough Information?
That's this question. :P
You can't really formulate a solid business plan without a lot more info then we have here. Doing so seems like you're acting more through emotion rather then business reasoning. (Which I will admit seems to be how many gaming companies do act...)
I'd want to know things like: What's popular about it? How do MY customers feel about it? How do they feel about it in comparison to my product? If my product is lacking features the new game offers, are my customers upset it lacks those features? If so can I reasonably add them to my product without causing a big issue? (system wise not legally or anything.)
Just seems like something you probably don't wan to decide on a whim.
Either way, you don't change your corporate strategy because one person challenges you. I don't think it's even a blip on your radar, to be honest.
For a business in a small niche hobby like tabletop rpgs, I would imagine this is the case.
On the other hand, in a huge multinational business with a worldwide oligopoly or cartel, that's a completely different story. Examples of this would be diamonds, oil, pharma drugs, etc ...
In response to this, I have to ask if the OP wasn't a leading anti-WotC question? If it wasn't, I really didn't understand what you were getting at.
Eh, I already tried to reply to this. Is that complicated? I do not believe I am getting at anywhere in particular. Just let us discuss about our instincts on how our market works or might work or should work.
The case might be extreme or a pipe dream but it serves its purpose regarding the expectations of people regarding our hobby (say hobby to not repeat market and its ok since till now they are very strongly connected -and this connection is the link that makes the discussion interesting)
Last edited by xechnao; 30th June 2009 at 08:46 PM..
I'd want to know things like: What's popular about it? How do MY customers feel about it? How do they feel about it in comparison to my product? If my product is lacking features the new game offers, are my customers upset it lacks those features? If so can I reasonably add them to my product without causing a big issue? (system wise not legally or anything.)
The "band aid" way of dealing with this, is to write up new splatbooks which replicate some of the new desirable features. In the case of TSR, it was publishing books like Unearthed Arcana (1E AD&D), Player's Options books (2E AD&D), etc ...
Eh, I already tried to reply to this. Is that complicated? I do not believe I am getting at anywhere in particular. Just let us discuss about our instincts on how our market works or might work or should work.
The case might be extreme or a pipe dream but it serves its purpose regarding the expectations of people regarding our hobby (say hobby to not repeat market and its ok since till now they are very strongly connected)
I have two concerns, the game as I play it and the game as it exists in theory. Feelings ain't got nothing to do with it, and bringing feelings into this does nothing but muddy the waters. There are peoples feelings and then there is reality, and when peoples feelings drift far away from reality, they stop mattering to everyone else outside of that little world.
For what its worth, I asked a direct question and did not get a direct answer. I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I will say that if you don't want people misunderstanding you or tearing your posts apart, you should try speaking in plain English. This flowery language is pretty and all, but it really muddies what you are trying to say.
I have two concerns, the game as I play it and the game as it exists in theory. Feelings ain't got nothing to do with it, and bringing feelings into this does nothing but muddy the waters. There are peoples feelings and then there is reality, and when peoples feelings drift far away from reality, they stop mattering to everyone else outside of that little world.
For what its worth, I asked a direct question and did not get a direct answer. I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I will say that if you don't want people misunderstanding you or tearing your posts apart, you should try speaking in plain English. This flowery language is pretty and all, but it really muddies what you are trying to say.
Oh, man. I asked you to avoid this yet you keep asking for what, a declaration of war? The direct answer you are talking about does not exist. If it is muddy for you then so be it. Market does move on feelings or rather, to be more precise, the consumer's base feelings or expectations is an existing force in shaping and driving markets.
By posing the question in the OP and trying to answer it, I let us consider some things. Not necessarily for shaping the market but figuring out how we want it, how we expect it and how we should expect it to be. For me this holds some interest. If it does not hold for you then do not participate. It is not like that you have to answer the questionnaire.
...do nothing unless that revolutionary design probes directions that you, as a company, are confident and enthusiastic to probe as well from a corporate point of view.
Historical case in point: Mike Mearls' work for Malhavoc Press. Mearls basically showed WotC that they hadn't fully explored the DDM-side to 3.5, even though there was plenty of that to explore in the ruleset. Look at Iron Might, look at the IH Bestiary, look at NPC class templates for quick and easy NPC generation. Mearls also showed WotC that there was plenty else to explore in D&D - stunts, skill challenges, rituals - without the need to throw the core elements to 3.5 over board (contrast the later Tomes for 3.5 which basically never once built on the traditional strenghts on 3.5). Mearls basically showed WotC that they hadn't fully played to their strength.
And now we're talking. Here's someone who's producing solid design and whose ideas are in line with what WotC itself wants to see in D&D.
There's no such thing as "awesome" design inherently threatening a corporate's vision of D&D. (I mean, you think BW or Mouseguard is of interest to WotC? Hardly.) It's when the two - innovation and corporate vision - coincide that we see the sparks flying left and right, and things move onto "Alriiiight, now lets base your innovative design ideas on solid math, shall we?"
I find very little innovative on 4E. What's new and exciting is that ideas that were formerly half-baked got a much more smooth engine to support them. (I'll excempt skill challenges from this estimate, but the rest is right up there.)
For what its worth, I asked a direct question and did not get a direct answer.
Actually, you did get a direct answer.
"I was more interested in the game development kind of things. Would Wotc choose to try to lead by developing the best game it could or would it rather focus on leading by the current market standards?"
That is quite simple, really. That you don't accept that as direct is the real issue of the moment.
If there was, originally, the intent to generate an anti-WotC screed, it is now clear that's not going to happen. The answers so far don't support it, and the activity of several mods in the thread should keep things peaceful.
Oh, man. I asked you to avoid this yet you keep asking for what, a declaration of war? The direct answer you are talking about does not exist. If it is muddy for you then so be it. Market does move on feelings or rather, to be more precise, the consumer's base feelings or expectations is an existing force in shaping and driving markets.
By posing the question in the OP and trying to answer it, I let us consider some things. Not necessarily for shaping the market but figuring out how we want it, how we expect it and how we should expect it to be. For me this holds some interest. If it does not hold for you then do not participate. It is not like that you have to answer the questionnaire.
Ok then, lets consider this:
Lets speculate that the RPG market did move the design of 4E. Lets also speculate that the consumer base's feelings and expectations shaped and drove the market. Lets also speculate that these forces produced 4E exactly how it came to be. There were other forces, as all the internet bickering can attest to, but those forces were drowned out by the stronger forces that produced 4E. WotC then, in serving the bulk of its customers, produced and innovative, excellent and very specific game to serve those interests. Some people whose interests were different were left behind, and deemed in advance to be acceptable losses which would be offset by producing a stronger game with more appeal to new players.
I ask you what all this market talk is about, and if we are assuming that WotC pulled 4E out of thin air or if 4E was what the market was demanding? I ask to speculate whether 4E naysayers are a market that can be served at all at this point, or if accomodating them would destroy the goodwill WotC has with its existing 4E base. I would also speculate whether 4E naysayers are truly a threat to WotC's bottom line.
I find it hard to believe that a company of WotC's stature and resources would put out a game without any clue what they are doing. I also find it hard to believe that 4E is not doing well and not serving the RPG market in the big picture.
Lets also speculate that these forces produced 4E exactly how it came to be. There were other forces, as all the internet bickering can attest to, but those forces were drowned out by the stronger forces that produced 4E.
This is valid but it is not mathematically precise. You can't measure mathematically the influence of one driving force or the other. This is why I am talking about political decisions. Wotc has not one, but more cards to play to its advantage. By focusing on some extreme cases one could try to figure out the value and importance of each card by its own. Wotc has the strongest hand in the market as it stands. But the game is dynamic and the card deck plays on. Moreover the card deck may change byitself. This is why a company wants to listen to its cystomers or the market too. This thread allows you in a way to think and speak up as a customer. Not regarding 4e, but rather the nature of our community, hobby and market. About how we expect or want games to be created. And about how important each of these forces at hand seems to be or become.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
I ask you what all this market talk is about, and if we are assuming that WotC pulled 4E out of thin air or if 4E was what the market was demanding? I ask to speculate whether 4E naysayers are a market that can be served at all at this point, or if accomodating them would destroy the goodwill WotC has with its existing 4E base. I would also speculate whether 4E naysayers are truly a threat to WotC's bottom line.
Do not make 4e the focal point of this discussion, nor of the ultimate focus of the community or the hobby itself. Think of procedure. Think of how these things operate or tend to operate.
I would also speculate whether 4E naysayers are truly a threat to WotC's bottom line.
This can probably be answered in the negative. The OD&D, 1E AD&D, B/X D&D, BECMI, 2E AD&D, etc ... grognards are most likely out of the picture. They probably just hang out on their own boards like Dragonsfoot, reminiscing about the "old days" amongst themselves.
This is valid but it is not mathematically precise. You can't measure mathematically the influence of one driving force or the other. This is why I am talking about political decisions. Wotc has not one, but more cards to play to its advantage. By focusing on some extreme cases one could try to figure out the value and importance of each card by its own. Wotc has the strongest hand in the market as it stands. But the game is dynamic and the card deck plays on. Moreover the card deck may change byitself. This is why a company wants to listen to its cystomers or the market too. This thread allows you in a way to think and speak up as a customer. Not regarding 4e, but rather the nature of our community, hobby and market. About how we expect or want games to be created. And about how important each of these forces at hand seems to be or become.
What you are describing here is better known as "scenario planning" in the business world.
This is valid but it is not mathematically precise. You can't measure mathematically the influence of one driving force or the other. This is why I am talking about political decisions. Wotc has not one, but more cards to play to its advantage. By focusing on some extreme cases one could try to figure out the value and importance of each card by its own. Wotc has the strongest hand in the market as it stands. But the game is dynamic and the card deck plays on. Moreover the card deck may change byitself. This is why a company wants to listen to its cystomers or the market too. This thread allows you in a way to think and speak up as a customer. Not regarding 4e, but rather the nature of our community, hobby and market. About how we expect or want games to be created. And about how important each of these forces at hand seems to be or become.
So then this thread is about the belief that other companies will put out a better game than WotC, and the moral/political/market ramifications of allowing WotC or smaller games to lead the hobby? Or even more specifically the significance of WotC in its role as the 800lb gorilla in the room dominating everything and the effect of that dominance on a possible future gaming revolution?
Personally, I consider myself a casual gamer who likes to kill things, take their stuff, and get xp to build my character while playing combat focused high fantasy. 4E D&D handles that better than any game I've experienced, and it also delivers a strong brand name and the easy to find players to go with it. I'm perfectly happy with my corporate overlords, and think their fall from dominance would hurt my satisfaction with the RPG hobby.
Quote:
Originally Posted by xechnao
Do not make 4e the focal point of this discussion, nor of the ultimate focus of the community or the hobby itself. Think of procedure. Think of how these things operate or tend to operate.
But, at the same time, 4E is the 800lb gorilla in the room, and being such isn't something you can really ignore. If we are talking about a fantasy world where anything can happen maybe, but if we are talking reality not so much. Any discussion of what you are proposing will have to deal with the market dominance of the current edition of D&D that has been the case throughout the entire history of RPGs.
I would send my Maxim Calendar-Girl Death Squad to kill him for his insolence. ... EDIT: I forgot to mention that, in addition to plexiglass helmets (as per the Evil Overlord's Guide), the MCGDS would also have cellophane uniforms.
The following is a bit dated, and I kindly ask people to employ personal discretion before clicking on the link. It's not so much pixelated top-chest nudity (although you risk exposure to that too) as the strangeness of British humour with its perturbing after effects on your DM imagination.
"A most revolutionary and awesome game design"? Compared to what? There's no magic bullet -- almost every RPG is loved by some, hated by others.
That's why this is a nonsensical question. You're assuming a magic bullet that can create a situation where WOTC staff beholds this amazing work of creativity and views it as an'external threat'. That's simply never gioing to happen. This is the real world here, profits and marketing and cost-benefit analyses rule.
If it were possible to create a mystical document that was enjoyed (and actively praised) by all its writer intended as its audience, the author would probably use that power to take over a small country, rather than try to supplant 4e.
So to take my best shot at seriously answer the question -- they'd do nothing, they'd not notice, and the 'revolutionary and awesome game design' would be left as either a free ebook on the net or sold as a small print run for a limited audience.
Personally, I consider myself a casual gamer who likes to kill things, take their stuff, and get xp to build my character while playing combat focused high fantasy. 4E D&D handles that better than any game I've experienced, and it also delivers a strong brand name and the easy to find players to go with it. I'm perfectly happy with my corporate overlords, and think their fall from dominance would hurt my satisfaction with the RPG hobby.
The thread is not asking this. The thread is asking what you would be doing if you were Wotc in the scenario presented. What you are saying here is how much you like right now 4e and that you wish it stayed forever. You keep going on a derailing mindset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecasualoblivion
But, at the same time, 4E is the 800lb gorilla in the room, and being such isn't something you can really ignore. If we are talking about a fantasy world where anything can happen maybe, but if we are talking reality not so much. Any discussion of what you are proposing will have to deal with the market dominance of the current edition of D&D that has been the case throughout the entire history of RPGs.
I did not say ignore. I said do not make it the ultimate focus as you keep on doing. You must just consider it as a factor with its own importance and employ your instincts about the business planning ggroy noted. That is all.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
