D&D 5E So, 5e OGL

[CapnZapp]

But it's not all stuff you don't need - specifically, some sort of character creation rules are needed. (Which doesn't necessarily mean someone needs a PHB, of course, but they do need something.)

Somebody always have a PHB.

And you only need that at campaign start.

 

[Umbran]

Conveniently, that is exactly the stuff you don't need

Meaning:

I don't bother with xp calculations and awards, I award levels when it feels appropriate.

I don't use the CR and ECL type of stuff, since that's useless.

So no wonder the SRD3 omissions weren't a problem - they actually made the game better!

Well, "Can experienced players play their own house-ruled version of the game?" is not the same as "Can anyone play the game?"

Technically, I can play a game with no written rules whatsoever, or only what is in my own head, right? I can jot down my memories, call them the rules and play. I don't technically need rules at all, and never did, right? Technically, it's just a structured "let's pretend," and I can do that without anything from any company.

But, strangely, though none of us have ever needed any rules whatsoever... we all want them and buy them and use them. Thus, the logic of "I can play the game with that if I just ignore things they left out" seems a bit of a blithe statement.

Specifically, for you - you have this thing where you award levels when it feels appropriate. That's fine for an experienced gamer, but, like many house rules, it is really based on knowing the rule first, and then making a planned departure from them.

But, for someone new trying to pick up the game, there's not even a *hint* of how to do that in the d20 SRD, now is there? A new player would look, see all these levels and ask, "Well, what are these things, and how do I go from one to another?" It is not a realistic expectation that they'd just by random chance, hit upon the idea of just going up levels every once in a while, and just happen to execute it at a rate that's particularly pleasing to the folks at the table. They'd fumble around, and have a bad experience, and probably give up.

 

[delericho]

Somebody always have a PHB.

So they can play with the SRD only and no PHB... provided someone has a PHB?

 

[MoonSong]

You know, between the basic rules, the srd, UA, EE, and SCAG previews, there is tons of material to play D&D for free and legally.

 

[BryonD]

I have no doubt that the path Paizo chose is the correct one (or at least, a correct one). Their continued success certainly bears that out. I'm just pointing out that Pathfinder works on a freemium model, and that model will always lose some sales somewhere. I'm not asserting that there's a way they could have made more TOTAL sales, just that the sales they gained from the expansion of their network is always somewhat countered by the people (like myself) who take advantage of the free offer for information they might otherwise have paid for.

My only actual point is the very basic point that balancing free and paid material is always going to be the search for some point of maximum sales, and it's a tricky thing to find the tipping point.

Cool, I'm glad we agree.
The context of your original comment was making the case to Mark that there were "lost sales". http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-OGL/page144&p=6799728&viewfull=1#post6799728
Now you are agreeing that maybe there were no "lost sales". If you had said that in the first place then I would not have replied.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Cool, I'm glad we agree.
The context of your original comment was making the case to Mark that there were "lost sales". http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-OGL/page144&p=6799728&viewfull=1#post6799728
Now you are agreeing that maybe there were no "lost sales". If you had said that in the first place then I would not have replied.

Of course there were lost sales. Some people exist that heard of pathfinder, wanted to play, found the SRD, and never bought a book they would otherwise have purchased. To deny this happened is engaging in wishful thinking.

Now, the effect of that versus those that were curious, read the SRD, and they purchased the core books and/or additional books they would not otherwise have because of they liked what they saw in the SRD is something that I think we agree with. The latter balances or exceeds the former. In aggregate, it generates more sales than it loses.

But it's absolutely ridiculous to say that the SRDs were not competition for the PHBs or Pathfinder books. They were. It was exceedingly likely, though, that was overcome by the goodwill, preview, and follow-on title effects of having the SRDs out there.

 

[TwoSix]

Cool, I'm glad we agree.
The context of your original comment was making the case to Mark that there were "lost sales". http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-OGL/page144&p=6799728&viewfull=1#post6799728
Now you are agreeing that maybe there were no "lost sales". If you had said that in the first place then I would not have replied.

Well, just to split hairs, I do think there were "lost sales", but they've gained far more by expanding the game network by giving so much away for free.

Like I said, I didn't buy the core book because the SRD is free. I consider that a lost sale, even if the fact that I've decided to run a Pathfinder game because it's free means that people from my table have bought 10 books because of the fact that I'm running the game now. Pathfinder is still up 9 sales because of that decision, because they've gained 10 sales by sacrificing one. It's a purely semantic distinction about what a "lost sale" constitutes, but it's important to recognize that they've maximized sales by sacrificing some sales of base rules to gain player base which will more than make up for that loss.

 

[Nellisir]

Well, just to split hairs, I do think there were "lost sales", but they've gained far more by expanding the game network by giving so much away for free.

Like I said, I didn't buy the core book because the SRD is free. I consider that a lost sale, even if the fact that I've decided to run a Pathfinder game because it's free means that people from my table have bought 10 books because of the fact that I'm running the game now. Pathfinder is still up 9 sales because of that decision, because they've gained 10 sales by sacrificing one. It's a purely semantic distinction about what a "lost sale" constitutes, but it's important to recognize that they've maximized sales by sacrificing some sales of base rules to gain player base which will more than make up for that loss.

To throw in a totally useless bit of anecdotal information, I've bought several Pathfinder books (4? 5?) and I don't play the game. The SRD material is convenient for game prep (for me), but not for reading (for me). And I'm well aware that the same material is online; it's just not convenient.

 

[Nellisir]

Well, "Can experienced players play their own house-ruled version of the game?" is not the same as "Can anyone play the game?"

Technically, I can play a game with no written rules whatsoever, or only what is in my own head, right? I can jot down my memories, call them the rules and play. I don't technically need rules at all, and never did, right? Technically, it's just a structured "let's pretend," and I can do that without anything from any company.

Most people call this "life".

 

[TwoSix]

To throw in a totally useless bit of anecdotal information, I've bought several Pathfinder books (4? 5?) and I don't play the game. The SRD material is convenient for game prep (for me), but not for reading (for me). And I'm well aware that the same material is online; it's just not convenient.

Oh, absolutely, that describes half my gaming bookshelf.