D&D 4E 4E in 2008? Fact or Fiction?

[Ranger REG]

3.5 was pushed ahead of schedule, was it not? These things can change.

IMHO, 3.5e came out too early. I initially thought it was parent company Hasbro's influence over WotC, a subsidiary company. I still do.

 

[palleomortis]

More money for the beast. Now we have to buy minis to play it too.

 

[wingsandsword]

Regarding WotC pulling the Open Gaming License, technically they cannot. HOWEVER, they can pull the d20 System Trademark License.

Remember earlier in this thread, apparently some people are afraid that "Big Bad Hasbro" is going to say "We pull the OGL" and start suing. As the recent lawsuit about the monopoly add-on is showing, Hasbro isn't invincible in court (nobody is) and 3rd party add-ons to games are legal (especially ones created under a "perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive" license like the OGL, to quote it). They're afraid that because they're a big company they'll automatically win and that no other company could afford to try and stand against them, even if they are blatantly in the wrong.

It's like with the disbelieving Charles Ryan bit, some people just will never, ever trust any big corporation (and assume they are monolithic, invincible oppressors), every word from a WotC employee is a lie (if it says something you disagree with or that might be good, like the person over all RPG's at WotC saying they don't want to mess with a winning formula so it's not coming out for years and we're going to get 1 to 2 years advance notice) and to trust even the most obscure rumors that make them look bad (a WizO once said it's coming out in 2008, even if he would have no way of knowing and even if he did he'd be under a big NDA, and we don't even have the original quote to work with), and act like that in the world of RPG's, Hasbro is the faceless evil bad-guy out to ruin D&D and kick your dog.

 

[Kanegrundar]

More money for the beast. Now we have to buy minis to play it too.

You don't HAVE to buy minis to play, but you can if you want. I usually play with minis, but I can just as easily not.

Kane

 

[jrients]

It's like with the disbelieving Charles Ryan bit, some people just will never, ever trust any big corporation (and assume they are monolithic, invincible oppressors), every word from a WotC employee is a lie (if it says something you disagree with or that might be good, like the person over all RPG's at WotC saying they don't want to mess with a winning formula so it's not coming out for years and we're going to get 1 to 2 years advance notice) and to trust even the most obscure rumors that make them look bad (a WizO once said it's coming out in 2008, even if he would have no way of knowing and even if he did he'd be under a big NDA, and we don't even have the original quote to work with), and act like that in the world of RPG's, Hasbro is the faceless evil bad-guy out to ruin D&D and kick your dog.

Because the company isn't monolithic, we should take Mr. Ryan's word as gospel? That doesn't make sense to me. I take his pronouncement with a grain of salt precisely because large corporations aren't monolithic. If the Hasbro board of director's wants a 4E by Christmas '05, then what could Charles Ryan do to stop it? That's a ludicrous scenario, I admit. I'm just saying no one person can give anyone absolute assurances on these things.

 

[Henry]

I mean no disrespect for Charles Ryan, but please remember that there's no guarantee he'll even BE business manager there still in one years' time, much less have the same policy-influencing powers then as he does now. A lot of good people at WotC have come and gone, and as those ranks have shifted, the amount of direct interaction with the fans keeps shrinking, or appearing to, at least. Also, the promises made by those in charge in the past have been revised as new management steps up to forge their own ways. There's no reason to think this won't continue.

I'm personally thankful for Keith Strohm, Erik Mona (who run Paizo) and Charles Ryan and Andy Collins (from WotC) for the input they do have on ENWorld, the WotC Forums, RPG.Net, etc. But the number of people working with WotC in a direct capacity who keep direct ties with the fans is a far cry from what it was 3 to 4 years ago.

 

[Ranger REG]

Remember earlier in this thread, apparently some people are afraid that "Big Bad Hasbro" is going to say "We pull the OGL" and start suing. As the recent lawsuit about the monopoly add-on is showing, Hasbro isn't invincible in court (nobody is) and 3rd party add-ons to games are legal (especially ones created under a "perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive" license like the OGL, to quote it). They're afraid that because they're a big company they'll automatically win and that no other company could afford to try and stand against them, even if they are blatantly in the wrong.

Hmm. Then perhaps for insurance, we should set up a legal defense fund to protect the Open Gaming License. Perhaps that this should be the Open Gaming Foundation's new purpose.

BTW, that lawsuit you mentioned, Hasbro didn't release a royalty-free trademark license for their Monopoly game, so that should have been ruled in Hasbro's favor.

It's like with the disbelieving Charles Ryan bit, some people just will never, ever trust any big corporation (and assume they are monolithic, invincible oppressors), every word from a WotC employee is a lie (if it says something you disagree with or that might be good, like the person over all RPG's at WotC saying they don't want to mess with a winning formula so it's not coming out for years and we're going to get 1 to 2 years advance notice) and to trust even the most obscure rumors that make them look bad (a WizO once said it's coming out in 2008, even if he would have no way of knowing and even if he did he'd be under a big NDA, and we don't even have the original quote to work with), and act like that in the world of RPG's, Hasbro is the faceless evil bad-guy out to ruin D&D and kick your dog.

Are these the same people who claimed George Lucas ruined their childhood for releasing the Prequel Trilogy?

Regarding the rumor of a certain WizO, I didn't catch his or her name. I'd like to hear straight from this person.

One shouldn't trust anyone in any business, even that mom-n-pop store in your neighborhood. They're trying to make money any way they can, pure and simple.

I personally believe that the fan community might be giving companies mixed signals. While I can only speak for myself, I never asked for 3.5e back in 2002. I never demanded any kind of revision for D&D Third Edition. Yet WotC must have heard demands for it from their fanbase.

Now, we're getting discussion threads about 4e. Mixed signals? Or is there a growing voice in our community that want yet another edition? They must be financially rich, farting $$$ out of their arse to want to spend $90 again. Is there dissatisfaction over the recent version to warrant such a demand?

Now, I have nothing but contempt for that faction of our community.

 

[MerricB]

I mean no disrespect for Charles Ryan, but please remember that there's no guarantee he'll even BE business manager there still in one years' time, much less have the same policy-influencing powers then as he does now. A lot of good people at WotC have come and gone, and as those ranks have shifted, the amount of direct interaction with the fans keeps shrinking, or appearing to, at least. Also, the promises made by those in charge in the past have been revised as new management steps up to forge their own ways. There's no reason to think this won't continue.

I'm personally thankful for Keith Strohm, Erik Mona (who run Paizo) and Charles Ryan and Andy Collins (from WotC) for the input they do have on ENWorld, the WotC Forums, RPG.Net, etc. But the number of people working with WotC in a direct capacity who keep direct ties with the fans is a far cry from what it was 3 to 4 years ago.

Add to the list Rob Heinsoo, Mike Donais, Stephen Schubert and Rich Baker. (Keith Baker is also very active, though working freelance).

I don't know - I think Wizards are still very, very active on the forums, and Charles Ryan is a GOD, answering many important questions.

Cheers!

 

[Henry]

Add to the list Rob Heinsoo, Mike Donais, Stephen Schubert and Rich Baker.

I haven't really seen them at any of the three forums, though if I've missed them I'm grateful they've been so active.

 

[MerricB]

I haven't really seen them at any of the three forums, though if I've missed them I'm grateful they've been so active.

Rich Baker has a huge thread on the Wizards boards where he answers FR questions.

Mike, Rob and Shoe tend to post mainly on the mini boards at Wizards, but I've seen Shoe popping up on Future Releases to mention stuff about things like Heroes of Battle.

Ian Richards (head of the RPGA) also posts on a fairly regular basis on the RPGA boards and occasionally in Minis.

Cheers!