OGL:Someone releases as OGC a most revolutionary & awesome game design.You, Wotc...

"You, WotC..."

...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.)

thecasualoblivion said:

For what its worth, I asked a direct question and did not get a direct answer.

Click to expand...

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.

So, please stop with the badgering. Thank you.

xechnao said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

thecasualoblivion said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

thecasualoblivion said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

thecasualoblivion said:

I would also speculate whether 4E naysayers are truly a threat to WotC's bottom line.

Click to expand...

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.

xechnao said:

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.

Click to expand...

What you are describing here is better known as "scenario planning" in the business world.

Scenario planning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

xechnao said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

xechnao said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Halivar said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

SpikedHumor.com » Monty Python - Meaning of Life - Part 7 - Death » SpikedHumor.com

The premise is flawed.

"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.

thecasualoblivion said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

thecasualoblivion said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.