Search results

And? This refutes nothing of what I was talking about. Understanding the whole 4e-5e situation can be explained by extrapolating from what I have already posted. WotC committed an own goal with 4e: They split the player base. (This is that part in my post where I said that: "The market leader...

You're right. The term was used incorrectly. It was My fault for leaning into that. I caused unnecessary confusion by doing so. So forget the term "sunk cost" and instead replace with: Network Effect And this point: Is then sufficiently addressed by my post. As are the points you just made...

Exactly. All of D&D's early potential "competitors" failed to emulate the things that D&D got right sufficiently in spite of whatever innovations they introduced to build up any real competitive momentum. By the late 70's early 80's it was a wrap. D&D had the critical mass by then.

I Made no such claim. I said that there is nothing inherently special about D&D's system that makes it the Market Leader in most of RPG land. Because being Good Enough is all that is needed when you are the First Mover, and you service your customers. Evidence of this claim was given when I...

Which is why in the very post you quote I said: "It's all about First, Good Enough, and Servicing your customer base." Which is why in a few cases in other countries home grown systems became ascendant over D&D. Except you said no such thing in your last post. (I checked). I critiqued D&D...

I'm sure people who began playing RPG's with The Dark Eye in Germany, or Sword World in Japan do the same thing. People like what they are familiar with. Which is usually the first RPG they play. And most people who got into RPG's are most familiar with D&D. Which defines for them what the RPG...

We will disagree then. Where you see progress/addressing issues; I see half measures that fail to go to the root of the problem. IMHO: Half measures = Still broken... After several editions: Still Broken = They like it that way... As always: YMMV. I disagree here thoroughly. As the few...

That's not the point I was making. If I was a betting man, I'd wager you probably represent a majority of people who were turned off by 4e when they gave it a try. It certainly isn't any one mechanic, enough 4e got re-fluffed/translated into 5e that most can see direct connections. Rather it...

These two go together: Many people decided that they did not like the particular way 4e addressed the issue of LFQW. Evidently 4e's designers wanted to do things a bit differently, but such is the way that cookie crumbled. Yes, there is a lot of untrue anti-4e nonsense out there. But 4e...

You should try to not project your personal hang-ups on to other people. Ms. Williams sex is completely irrelevant to my point. If you want to scold people who continually think in terms of "gender"; I recommend the nearest mirror. 'Cause I gave it to Chris Cocks pretty good too...

We're definitely talking past each other a bit here... My view: I dismiss Mr. Fields gaming experience out of hand because he will be doing his thing on the Digital Gaming side of things. I'm not a video gamer - I can care less what WotC does in this regard. I care about the Table top side...

Did I? You said: The Ceo/Leader is Williams who is not a gamer. Mr. Fields, the lifelong gamer, is Senior Vice President and General Manager of Digital Gaming. He will have little to nothing to do with the table top side of MtG and D&D. What Vitriol? Italics are for emphasis. And...

Williams is not a gamer. She came to Microsoft via Amazon. She is an operations and brand management person. Fields is the gaming guy. The mobile gaming guy... At this point it's obvious WotC wants to move the D&D brand into the digital sphere to where the big gaming/media bucks are...

In the context of the historically revisionist hypothetical situation that never happened, that I posited at the end of post #104... If TSR went under in 2000 - and you wanted to grab as much market share as possible from the power vacuum they left: Then, Yes. As much as possible make your...

Your reading too much into things here. Nothing holy about the d20 system at all. It's just Pure pragmatism. Easier to flip people to your new game if it is close to what they are used to.

Well, that is a big what-if... I'm inclined to believe that D&D just had too much headway by then. And RQ came out with 2 strikes against it right away. First: While the role under d100 die mechanic may have been more intuitive. RQ then added a lot of complication on top of it that negated...

They'll figure it out for themselves. Truth. Few licensed products do really well in RPG land over the long haul. There are basically three licensed IP that consistently do well almost regardless of system, and actually get played on a relatively wide scale: The Lord of the Rings, Conan, And...

Not conveniently - just flat out forgot! :eek: But it changes nothing about what I posted. The Star Trek IP has never really come to anything in RPG land. And not for lack of trying. However popular as a show - its premise has never translated into the kind of sales and popularity as an RPG...

Yes hindsight is 20/20. But in this case we do have it. Like Random task said: Agreed. So, I don't want this to come across like I'm slagging on Traveller per se. It is a solidly designed RPG, with a loyal following, that has stood the test of time. That being said: Traveller has never...

I would rather say something like TFT would be a logical substitute. After all we need to remember that D&D was a known quantity when TFT was created. And the game received little follow up. I disagree. For two different reasons. First: Traveller was made after D&D came out. It was not...