Search results

The new SRD can be used under the OGL exactly as it was in the 3E era. They have ALSO added the DMG options on top of that and the controls you list apply there, but only there. Perhaps it has enough added value that it effectively produces this result. But the OGL is still the OGL.

The new SRD can be used under the OGL exactly as it was in the 3E era. They have ALSO added the DMG options on top of that and the controls you list apply there, but only there. Perhaps it has enough added value that it effectively produces this result. But the OGL is still the OGL...

long absence..... :) Likely to continue.... Being 10% up or whatever the number may be does not in any way make it any less of a teapot.

This still adds ZERO new information. 5E is "strong" compared to anything D&D has seen in quite a few years. So it is completely fair and accurate to make this statement. But it provides no information at all in regard to "are the margins worth investment?". It was highly clear when 4E was...

I've already fully agreed that it is dominating the teapot. My point is that the teapot isn't big enough.

I've got more material than I'll ever use in my lifetime on my shelves. There is a difference between looking for material and cultivating a thriving marketbase. And, again, the current large and stable market is a great credit to the quality of the core game. But Less than 18 months in a...

If production of splat was making the return WotC wanted, they would be producing more splat. They are not "investing" much in anything. I'm not saying they are bad guys or even making bad choices. They are allocating their resources into things which best benefit them. I wish that aligned...

I think this is a false option. It is "doing extremely well" because it is still the "new shiny" with the superstar brand name on it. To be clear, IMO it is a great game. But doing well is both completely relative and heavily influenced by what is going on around it. It is pretty much "doing...

Within the teapot which is the TTRPG fanbase, 5E is king. But is is just that, a teapot, and WotC has rightly decided that trying to make that teapot bigger won't happen and also decided that the teapot as-is is not worthy of significant investment.

Definitely. Everything else is just talking around that.

As I said, "if people like it". Note that this is about markets, not BryonD and not Jester Canuck. Combining these responses because I think you miss a key point in both: player base. If other people start gravitating to other games that WILL have an effect on you. Just ask the people who...

If someone likes two games and one produces new content and the other doesn't, the lack of new content will be a big driver for the majority of people to choose the other game. If they BOTH produce content then the one that produce BETTER content will be the driver. If NEITHER produce content...

Sure. The "they" in my post is the company and the people making the choices. And, to be clear, I'm not looking to bash companies for making what they believe to be best value choices for their resources. But if Chris is or is not completely on-board with me in wishing there was a lot more...

Your point is valid. But I don't think it is lack of a clue so much as it is spin. They don't want to produce books because it is not worth the investment. Obviously they would be pleased to know that a book they published becomes an at-table standard for many years to come. So the statement...

I'm not at all clear why we have to make the quantum leap to 10 books. It is also funny to see the same data interpreting mistakes of the last edition repeated. At this point in 4E's life it was still the conventional wisdom that it was the edition for a generation, a few hard-hearted...

I said they got people to buy the books and that is why they did it. What is your point with repeating my point as if it contradicts me? Who cares what you call it? I love new editions. You, however, are playing bait and switch with the vague concept of "new edition" against an implication...

First, calling 3.5 "rewritten extensively" deserves a nice *snort*. Go back and read Monte Cooke's comments on how little things changed and why it wasn't worth doing. But, that leads to the "why" of your question. Which is really trivially easy to answer. 3E was selling like gangbusters and...

Guilty At $25 I went ahead and bought it knowing it would be a let down (it was). But it was something and it was cheap, so I bought it hoping that success leads to a better production rate in the future. Now if they make me wait another year for this pittance again, I won't buy it because...

"many people clearly want" is a fair statement. But it seems really obvious that "many people really oppose" is also just as fair. So keep that in context. The question of "forcing" people to use something is valid. But only if we ignore the reality of what is being put out. 3E had TONs of...

How about we forget their stats and just ask: what if they simply believe that the powers of arcana (or a god behind it) is simply worth religious devotion?