Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ragnar_Deerslayer" data-source="post: 3813995" data-attributes="member: 11990">By putting out a new PHB, MM, and DMG each year, and designating them "Core," WotC is attempting to move from a production-based economic model towards a (semi-)subscription-based economic model.  This is a proven business model – ever heard of "planned obsolescence?" Companies don't just want high sales, they want ongoing sales.  Anybody remember the WotC Designer Dump?  A short while after Third Edition came out, WotC downsized, losing a lot of their braintrust because they couldn't afford to pay them once the massive sales of the core books levelled off.  One might interpret the release of the Revised books as a purely economic attempt to re-tap the "core books" sales figures.  (Monte Cook, IIRC, said that the Revised books were planned from before the release of the 3.0 books, but by the businessmen, not by the designers.)  This didn't work well; although lots of people re-bought the books, it made WotC lose a lot of credibility with their customer base.Well, we've been promised we won't have a "4.5."  I, for one, believe them.  Why?  The economic motivation that drove 3.5 is being diverted into producing a new "core trilogy" each year.  In a sense every year will be a "4.5;" but in another sence, each "4.5" will be less of a rehash of the earlier rules, and more new material.  (And we're being told about the plan in advance.)So.  This is what WotC is doing, and it makes perfect business sense for them to do it.  The question is, what does that mean for the players?  Practically speaking, what difference does it make for WotC to slap the words "Core Rulebook" on the front cover?  What does "Core" mean, anyway?Well, you could say "Core" is the minimum amount necessary to run a game of D&D.  But technically, you could run a game with the original 3.0 PHB (it included a brief appendix with a half-dozen monsters and a treasure table), and nobody considered that the "core."Another definition is "what you need to run a complete game of D&D."  But what is complete?  Surely, we won't be playing "incomplete" games of 4E for a year before the PHB II, MM II, and DMG II come out!A better definition, I think, would be "what everyone who publishes for D&D accepts as core." And here we might have some difficulty.  By definition, I think WotC will publish adventures and supplements that will need everything labeled "Core" to use.  (If they don't, then "Core" is nothing more than an advertising gimmick.)  But will all the third-party publishers do so?  I think it depends entirely on what's in the SRD.And that's the trick, isn't it?  Because in August 2010, there'll be three PHBs, three MMs, and three DMGs on the market.  If all of them are necessary for a new DM to get a game up and running with WotC's new module, "Return to the City of the Spider Queen," then the barrier to entry will be so high there won't be any new blood.  But if all the crunchy bits are in the SRD, the DM can get a single PHB, MM, and DMG, then look up and print out whatever else he needs online.  The barrier to entry will be lower, but for many people, the convenience of having the actual books (once they've accepted the content) will make the purchases worthwhile.If it's not in the SRD, the third-party publishers won't support it, and will create their own versions of "Frost Giants" (aka "Ice Giants," aka "Freeze Giants," etc.) and release them OGL (which I suspect they'll do anyway, at least for the popular monsters; I don't see Necromancer Games putting off a product for a year or two just to have "Official Canonized WotC Frost Giants" in their modules).So: if it's in the SRD, you can buy it, but won't need to; if it's not, the third-party publishers will take up (at least some of) the slack.  We're good either way.  (I personally knew more players than not who used the SRD for 3.5 rather than re-buying all their books.)Another issue is the fear of "crippleware" – the Monster Manual I not having iconic D&D monsters, the PHB not having iconic D&D races/classes, etc, in order to coerce us into buying the next year's books.  I don't think the MM will have sucky monsters – there are too many 3.x monster books to pick good monsters from – but, once again, I think the third-party publishers will take up the slack.  (Necromancer Games has already announced plans for a fourth ed Tome of Horrors.)Finally, "Core" may mean DMs who don't want certain elements in their games are faced with a chorus of "But it's Coooooooorrre!" from their players.  I am one of them.  I don't just game with my best friends; I meet many people by gaming with them, and I'd just rather not have to deal with such arguments at all.  Oh, well.</blockquote>

Verification