WotC Hasbro CEO Chris Cox, "I would say that the underlying thesis of our D&D business is all about digital,”

[Velderan]

Think you misread me I'm saying 1E was a cash grab and I basically agree with what you said.

The other 2 cash grab editions are 3.5 and 4E imho.

Just to be clear.

2e was a cash grab in that they tried to change the game enough to stop paying Gygax royalties.

 

[mamba]

2e was a cash grab in that they tried to change the game enough to stop paying Gygax royalties.

pretty soon we are at ‘every edition was a cash grab’

 

[Reynard]

pretty soon we are at ‘every edition was a cash grab’

The real cash grab was the friends we made along the way.

 

[MGibster]

I don't know where everyone is from, but a cash-grab is usually described as a product solely, or primarily, designed with the purpose of bringing in an influx of cash quickly with little attention paid to quality or improving the customer experience. Obviously every product a company releases is done so with the expectation that it will generate revenue, some products are even redesigned in an effort to appeal to changing customer tastes and expectations, but that isn't what makes it a cash-grab.

I can't really opine as to whether 1st edition AD&D was a cash-grab or not because I have no experince with earlier D&D products. The only edition I thought was a cash-grab was 3.5. The "improvements" they made were so incremental and did not necessitate a new or revised edition requiring me to purchase the core books all over again. And I'm saying that as someone who was excited about the announcement for 3.5 and ended up so disappointed with the product that I walked away from D&D again. As much as I disliked 4th edition, I don't consider that a cash-grab either. WotC was trying to respond to what they thought their customers wanted, but ended up falling flat on their faces.

 

[Oofta]

The real cash grab was the friends we made along the way.

So you're saying I should work on my pickpocketing skills?

 

[Blue]

Most video game adaptions are going to tweak things a little bit. It's not quite standard D&D but it's close enough to give you a feel for a real game.

I completely agree. Most video games tweak to a lesser or greater extent to the changed medium.

But I will mention if you want strict 5e rules, Solasta: Crown of the Magister is 5e SRD, plus some of their own subclasses and spells to make up for what is not OGL. It's on Steam and pretty good. It's not an AAA title, if you want that level of polish and voice acting for every line you won't have it. But it is actually faithful to 5e rules, not just "video game faithful".

 

[Oofta]

I completely agree. Most video games tweak to a lesser or greater extent to the changed medium.

But I will mention if you want strict 5e rules, Solasta: Crown of the Magister is 5e SRD, plus some of their own subclasses and spells to make up for what is not OGL. It's on Steam and pretty good. It's not an AAA title, if you want that level of polish and voice acting for every line you won't have it. But it is actually faithful to 5e rules, not just "video game faithful".

I agree, it is more true to actual D&D rules. I've played it and the follow up, along with many a homebrew. It is different from Baldur's gate, being more old school dungeon crawl and put together by a small team with a minimal budget. But still enjoyable in it's own way.

 

[Clint_L]

Did Peppa Pig come with that deal? I don’t think so. They bought something for 4000M and are selling it for 500M, that is a 3.5B loss unless they bought more than they are selling now

Sly might not be an analyst, but Forbes should have them, and they write the same thing “Hasbro is selling its eOne television and movie business to Lionsgate in an approximately $500 million deal, after having paid $4 billion for the company four years ago.”

Yes, Pepa Pig (and many other properties) came with that deal, and how hard would it have been for you to check that yourself before posting? Note that the Forbes magazine doesn't say anything about "losing 3 billion dollars." And so the actual story is that Hasbro sold off the television/movie production company that they got with the deal.

 

[Blue]

Not as a publicly traded company with shareholders…it’s all about the money. You can’t ever leave money on the table, it’s against the rules.

This is a very common myth, and people need to know this is false when it comes to American law.

According to the US Supreme Court:
"While it is certainly true that a central objective of for-profit corporations is to make money, modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not do so.”

(Emphasis mine.)

SOURCE: Here's the 2014 case that came from: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/13-354.html

 

[Blue]

3e was a result of tsr going bankrupt.

So a company buying an game from a failing company is automatically a cash grab? Including when they invest significantly in making a new updated edition before printing anything and realizing any profits?

That's... a mighty interesting definition of a "cash grab". It seems to include any business venture that hopes to be profitable.

DndOne is the first time in dnd’s history that we’re getting a new set of core books that isn’t because the company either makes a new edition or goes bankrupt.

Which are meaningless division points when it comes to talking about cash grabs since they have nothing to do with it.

New books to be purchased because they can slap on new art and a "50th Anniversary of D&D" icon isn't a cash grab, but a new edition is?

It’s funny how “cash grab” and “editions I don’t like” are almost always synonymous.

Funny, maybe. Suspect, yeah.