Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hasbro's CEO Reports OGL-Related D&D Beyond Cancellations Had Minimal Impact
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Justice and Rule" data-source="post: 8941475" data-attributes="member: 6778210"><p>Oh cool, how did that work out with their Magic moves? Did that raise or lower their stock prices?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They can set their own profits projections and make them so they are achievable without massive moves that spark backlash. This is not a skill competition like the NBA, this is them making deliberate choices. They didn't need to set such high predictions, they could have set things that were good while still in reason that didn't require them to take such risky, stupid steps. Again, that's greed. And if you want to say it's institutionalized, fine. But it still doesn't make it anything else.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're trying to find greater evils to justify why lesser evils aren't evil. There can be gradations of such things, smaller and larger. If you're cool with them destroying the community that was built around them just so they could make the equivalent of Fortnite dance emotes, that's fine because that's all on you. I just think that sort of behavior is bad and shouldn't be rewarded, and also that we should at least be honest with what it is.</p><p></p><p>My biggest problem with y'all is that the only way we stopped this was by getting outraged and saying "No", and now we have a bunch of people telling us that we shouldn't have been outraged because this is just was businesses do. You're just neutering what was done by telling them "It's okay, go ahead and do it again. We'll go to bat for you."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If you can buy the VTTs, I don't see why you wouldn't believe 3PPs. It's basically the same thing, but there are more of them. If you are going big, you want to remove risks, and having a bunch of people covering content you may or may not want to cover, thus putting you into competition with them?</p><p></p><p>To give an example, would you think that Wizards would do a crafting book for 5E if they weren't moving on from the edition? I'd say "No" because crafting has basically been covered a hundred times by other people and other groups. It's a no-win scenario because they have a hundred books people can compare theirs to and inevitably there will be <em>something</em> wrong with it even if they are good. Having those 3PPs, to them, restricts them and removes profit they could be making.</p><p></p><p>You can make this argument a dozen times and while I'd say it's <em>wrong</em>, I can't argue that it's at least <em>logical, </em>especially if you want to become the EA of Tabletop RPGs. And I'd wager that was some of the thought here: leverage your position to vassalize the market so that your end of it is <em>firmly </em>under your control.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, I disagree with this completely. If it was 3PP people calling them, this wouldn't have gotten into January. It was a combination of <em>everything</em>, because these were all necessary but not sufficient things to sustain an outrage campaign. The fans being angry enough to actually act on their anger, 3PPs standing firm in their refusal to be bullied, and even D&D influencers keeping momentum going. It's not just about one aspect, but the entire wave of things being hard to ignore and brush off: they couldn't control the narrative because they didn't have a single outside source vouching for them. That freaked them out, and I'd say the design studio gave them a face-saving out with the surveys.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But we do know they wanted to go from $150M profits to $1B. I'd say that their modeling said that would be difficult if they didn't take full control of their market. But also, it was their choice to make such sky-high projections. They could have said they'd double or even triple profits in that timespan and that'd still be astounding.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Justice and Rule, post: 8941475, member: 6778210"] Oh cool, how did that work out with their Magic moves? Did that raise or lower their stock prices? They can set their own profits projections and make them so they are achievable without massive moves that spark backlash. This is not a skill competition like the NBA, this is them making deliberate choices. They didn't need to set such high predictions, they could have set things that were good while still in reason that didn't require them to take such risky, stupid steps. Again, that's greed. And if you want to say it's institutionalized, fine. But it still doesn't make it anything else. You're trying to find greater evils to justify why lesser evils aren't evil. There can be gradations of such things, smaller and larger. If you're cool with them destroying the community that was built around them just so they could make the equivalent of Fortnite dance emotes, that's fine because that's all on you. I just think that sort of behavior is bad and shouldn't be rewarded, and also that we should at least be honest with what it is. My biggest problem with y'all is that the only way we stopped this was by getting outraged and saying "No", and now we have a bunch of people telling us that we shouldn't have been outraged because this is just was businesses do. You're just neutering what was done by telling them "It's okay, go ahead and do it again. We'll go to bat for you." If you can buy the VTTs, I don't see why you wouldn't believe 3PPs. It's basically the same thing, but there are more of them. If you are going big, you want to remove risks, and having a bunch of people covering content you may or may not want to cover, thus putting you into competition with them? To give an example, would you think that Wizards would do a crafting book for 5E if they weren't moving on from the edition? I'd say "No" because crafting has basically been covered a hundred times by other people and other groups. It's a no-win scenario because they have a hundred books people can compare theirs to and inevitably there will be [I]something[/I] wrong with it even if they are good. Having those 3PPs, to them, restricts them and removes profit they could be making. You can make this argument a dozen times and while I'd say it's [I]wrong[/I], I can't argue that it's at least [I]logical, [/I]especially if you want to become the EA of Tabletop RPGs. And I'd wager that was some of the thought here: leverage your position to vassalize the market so that your end of it is [I]firmly [/I]under your control. No, I disagree with this completely. If it was 3PP people calling them, this wouldn't have gotten into January. It was a combination of [I]everything[/I], because these were all necessary but not sufficient things to sustain an outrage campaign. The fans being angry enough to actually act on their anger, 3PPs standing firm in their refusal to be bullied, and even D&D influencers keeping momentum going. It's not just about one aspect, but the entire wave of things being hard to ignore and brush off: they couldn't control the narrative because they didn't have a single outside source vouching for them. That freaked them out, and I'd say the design studio gave them a face-saving out with the surveys. But we do know they wanted to go from $150M profits to $1B. I'd say that their modeling said that would be difficult if they didn't take full control of their market. But also, it was their choice to make such sky-high projections. They could have said they'd double or even triple profits in that timespan and that'd still be astounding. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hasbro's CEO Reports OGL-Related D&D Beyond Cancellations Had Minimal Impact
Top