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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5821379" data-attributes="member: 22779">No, I don't want to start a new thread.  Because this hits right at the heart of this one.The persistent tendency of people who want to talk about OGL in glowing terms to rewrite history gets right to the heart of this discussion.  Saying that Essentials is 4.5E, is like saying that the Rules Compendium for 3e is another version of the game.  But, it's not, because the RC is meant to be used in conjunction with core.  Just like Essentials.And that's where it comes back to the OGL discussion.  You keep harping about how great and wonderful the OGL is.  Yet, when pressed, you cannot actually provide any solid evidence.  You have a gut feeling, and that's great.  But, without anything concrete, it's all speculative.The fact that you would repeatedly, even after being shown to be wrong, insist that you're right about editions, casts serious doubt on your ability to speculate on how well the OGL did for 3e.Funny thing is, if you swim upthread a bit to Monte Cook's quote about the development of 3.5, we see that 4e actually follows EXACTLY what 3e was supposed to do - wait about 5 years or so, when the sales cool down, and release a new edition.  And, this is without an OGL.  So, wouldn't that point to the idea that the OGL actually cooled sales much faster than a non-OGL game?  After all, if the OGL was pushing sales, then shouldn't 3e have lasted longer than the 3 years that it did, and shouldn't 4e be the one being replaced after 3 years?Oh, but, of course, your argument hinges on the idea that 4.5 has already been released.  That 4e only lasted 2 years.  AHA!  Triumph for the OGL.  See, if 4e had been OGL, we wouldn't have a new edition two years out.  But, the problem is, Essentials is not a new edition.  Not in the slightest.  It's meant to be run side by side.Even Basic/Expert and AD&D were never meant to run side by side.  You can't take a Basic D&D elf and play it in an AD&D game.  It doesn't work.  An AD&D fighter is not meant to be played at the same table as a BD&D fighter.  Yet, it is entirely acceptable, even at official Organized Play events 100% sanctioned by WOTC to play an essentials fighter alongside a Core fighter.  Heck, even the DDI is set up to give you the options side by side.  When you look at the character options, they don't separate Essentials from Core at all.So, tell me again how Essentials is a new edition.</blockquote>

Verification