Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6592457" data-attributes="member: 996">If WotC hadn't pitched D&amp;D as a core brand, and gone straight into the current 'sustaining' mode, with minimal investment and slow publication, and laid off 90% of their staff, producing a ruleset like 5e?&nbsp; If they still used the same restrictive GSL, Pathfinder might still exist and be a contender for #1 RPG, maybe trading the top spot for the last 7 years, maybe having held that top spot for years now, depending on how little D&amp;D product was produced each year.&nbsp; If they'd gone with an updated OGL, Paizo might have been content to keep producing adventures rather than a competing game (regardless of the form the D&amp;D rules took, in all likelihood), leaving D&amp;D the leader in a small, possibly even smaller &amp; stodgier, industry.&nbsp; Either way, the key question is would they have gotten someone on board to bring the D&amp;D IP to other markets.&nbsp; If they did, maybe they could have piggybacked on the success of things like Game of Thrones and WoW.&nbsp; Or maybe not.&nbsp; Markets are fickle.&nbsp; The biggest difference would probably have been felt in some other line.&nbsp; By divesting from the RPG side of the D&amp;D IP some 2-4 years early, they'd've freed up capital for some other product.&nbsp; Maybe some idea that Hasbro never quite launched might be a hit, right now, if not for the capital put into D&amp;D as a TTRPG - or, conversely, maybe the investment would have been on some untried line that failed spectacularly.&nbsp; Or maybe some other existing line would have a few more products, or better on-line support or something.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6592457, member: 996"] If WotC hadn't pitched D&D as a core brand, and gone straight into the current 'sustaining' mode, with minimal investment and slow publication, and laid off 90% of their staff, producing a ruleset like 5e? If they still used the same restrictive GSL, Pathfinder might still exist and be a contender for #1 RPG, maybe trading the top spot for the last 7 years, maybe having held that top spot for years now, depending on how little D&D product was produced each year. If they'd gone with an updated OGL, Paizo might have been content to keep producing adventures rather than a competing game (regardless of the form the D&D rules took, in all likelihood), leaving D&D the leader in a small, possibly even smaller & stodgier, industry. Either way, the key question is would they have gotten someone on board to bring the D&D IP to other markets. If they did, maybe they could have piggybacked on the success of things like Game of Thrones and WoW. Or maybe not. Markets are fickle. The biggest difference would probably have been felt in some other line. By divesting from the RPG side of the D&D IP some 2-4 years early, they'd've freed up capital for some other product. Maybe some idea that Hasbro never quite launched might be a hit, right now, if not for the capital put into D&D as a TTRPG - or, conversely, maybe the investment would have been on some untried line that failed spectacularly. Or maybe some other existing line would have a few more products, or better on-line support or something. [/QUOTE]

Verification