D&D 5E PDFs and Next

[Scribble]

I am likely drifting into speculation and he is much more active regarding Magic.
But he was transferred away from the Boy Division, which includes Trasformers, GIJoe, and the like. Transformers alone is a billion dollar brand.
M:tG might be doing very well, but Hasbro owns such big subsidiaries as Tonka, Milton Bradley, Parker Brothers, Playskool, and Kenner. WotC is small potatoes in comparison.

Still, it's better to rule in hell, and CEO positions likely don't open up every day.

Alternatively they might have thought with his proven leadership record, WoTC could become a much bigger brand by putting him in charge.

 

[Umbran]

... I vowed to never again buy a WotC product until downloadable and ownable versions of all WotC products (previous and current editions) were made available again.

You know, never is a long time. And while I can understand the desire to see pdf versions of their work for sale. Honestly, even classic novels go "out of print" on occasion. Demanding that *everything* be available in pdf before you'll buy a single product from them is pretty darned steep.

 

[El Mahdi]

You know, never is a long time. And while I can understand the desire to see pdf versions of their work for sale. Honestly, even classic novels go "out of print" on occasion. Demanding that *everything* be available in pdf before you'll buy a single product from them is pretty darned steep.

As far as I know, everything was available before (as far as game publications...I'm not talking about novels...they can deal with Amazon and e-readers for that). If it wasn't everything, then it was pretty darned close. But, it probably is more accurate for me to say I want everything that was available before they pulled pdf's, to be available again,...and all products that came after that (all 4E pubs)...before I buy another WotC product.

That may seem unreasonable to some, and that's as fair an opinion as mine. But I won't reward WotC for behavior that I think is wrong.

My reasoning is, I don't ever need another D&D product...I have all I'd ever need for a lifetime of playing - and then some (you can have my dice when you pry them from my cold, dead, uberpowerful Lich hands!). I think that there are a very large amount of gamers who also feel they no longer need new D&D products. I think that the loss of such a large amount of gamers as current paying customers shows that. However, I do believe that if they make a game that a large amount of gamers want, then a large amount of gamers will buy it. That is if they aren't already voting with their feet and wallets because of other issues. For me, the pdf issue is paramount. I think they were 100% wrong in their reasoning for pulling them. And I think that whether intended or not, it was incredibly insulting to their fan base, and punishing their innocent fans...the majority of their fans...for the sins of a few. And that's just plain bad business. So I'm voting with my wallet.

Even if 5E isn't the game for me, I would buy at least the core books, and even occasional other products that strike my fancy, and most likely a DDI subscription...just as I did with 4E, which also wasn't my preferred game. But only if pdf's return first.

 

[IronWolf]

To be honest, this is by far more of a 'dealbreaker' than anything yet suggested about the rules.

This is my concern. So far I haven't seen anything I would consider a dealbreaker in the rules as presented so far or in the various L&L articles. But not having the ability to have a PDF of the rules would likely prevent me from buying it.

*Maybe* if someone else in my group wanted to run it I would buy the Players Rules, but I would not be investing in the line from the DM's side of things.

 

[Umbran]

That may seem unreasonable to some, and that's as fair an opinion as mine. But I won't reward WotC for behavior that I think is wrong.

With that phrasing, it sounds like you're ascribing a moral or ethical value to the choice. Is that your intent?

 

[El Mahdi]

With that phrasing, it sounds like you're ascribing a moral or ethical value to the choice. Is that your intent?

No. I apologize if it's coming across that way.

Unethical or immoral...? Not even close. Misguided, foolish, unreasonable...absolutely. Insulting...also yes. Intentionally insulting...I can't say with certainty, but I seriously doubt it. That would seem phenomonally foolish, and I don't think any company would purposefully do that (though there may be examples I've never seen). Financially wrong...I believe so. Though it's not the only cause of such problems for D&D, I believe it is contributory.

 

[Umbran]

Unethical or immoral...? Not even close. Misguided, foolish, unreasonable...absolutely. Insulting...also yes.

You had me, until you got to insulting. I don't see how choosing not to sell a particular product in a particular format at a given time time can reasonably be seen as an insult.

They're stated reasons for that choice may be insulting, but that's really separate, in my mind. Simply not making the product available is, in and of itself, insulting?

 

[Stormonu]

My reasoning is, I don't ever need another D&D product...I have all I'd ever need for a lifetime of playing - and then some (you can have my dice when you pry them from my cold, dead, uberpowerful Lich hands!).

If you're not using Dicenomicon, you are dead to us e-gamers.

 

[Stormonu]

You had me, until you got to insulting. I don't see how choosing not to sell a particular product in a particular format at a given time time can reasonably be seen as an insult.

They're stated reasons for that choice may be insulting, but that's really separate, in my mind. Simply not making the product available is, in and of itself, insulting?

I could see it being an insult as they were pulled "because of piracy" - thinking of us as a pack of thieves who only want to pirate copies of the books, as if no one bought them legally (Personally, I bought scores of the old $4 books and had about 13 on my wish list when they got pulled, so there). Now, if they had been pulled because of poor quality, that'd been fairly reasonable - some of the scans were horrid. But thatwasn't the reason they gave for pulling them.

To me, it was on about the level of a movie studio pulling all their back catalog of DVDs because someone made a copy of the DVD of their latest blockbuster - just to force everyone to go to the theaters (as if they'd put their 30+ year old movies back in said theaters).

 

[El Mahdi]

You had me, until you got to insulting. I don't see how choosing not to sell a particular product in a particular format at a given time time can reasonably be seen as an insult.

They're stated reasons for that choice may be insulting, but that's really separate, in my mind. Simply not making the product available is, in and of itself, insulting?

They pulled pdf's and kept them unavailable both because of the same reason (according to them): Piracy. That makes the reason and the action linked. I don't seperate the two. IMO, that's punishing the entirety of their customer base for the sins of a few. I find that insulting.

As a hypothetical only (not getting into politics): if a State decided to take away the right of all Senior Citizens to drive, because of the inability of a few Senior Citizens to safely do so, it would be seen by Senior Citizens as insulting (among other things). The reasoning and the action are not seperate and independent things.