Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8893408" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is plausible, and was part of Dancey's rationale for the OLG - ie contra some recent posts it was not &quot;altruistic&quot; but rather a calculated method of increasing WotC's market share and profits.But I was rejecting the claim that 3PP is why D&amp;D is so dominant, and are the reason everything revolves around D&amp;D. I think one of those reasons is the network externalities that Dancey used to go on about - 3PPs plug into those, and reinforce them, but didn't create them. I think another reason is that the style of RPGing that has been most popular from the mid-80s on has been catered to be every approach to D&amp;D since then with the exception of 4e. That style benefits from lush boxed sets, lush setting books, lush adventure and campaign guides. And only the biggest publishers have the resources to produce these - and so again there is a positive reinforcement mechanism that helps make one publisher dominant.Other publishers that have at various times been prominent - eg GDW with Traveller, ICE with RM/MERP, Chaosium with RQ and CoC, WW with Vampire - have found themselves able to replicate that model. The only publisher I know of at the moment who is doing that is Paizo, pursuant to the OGL, and are already in direct competition with WotC. Maybe there are others I'm ignorant of, who also have the wherewithal to capture a significant share of the D&amp;D market by offering support for the same model.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8893408, member: 42582"] This is plausible, and was part of Dancey's rationale for the OLG - ie contra some recent posts it was not "altruistic" but rather a calculated method of increasing WotC's market share and profits. But I was rejecting the claim that 3PP is why D&D is so dominant, and are the reason everything revolves around D&D. I think one of those reasons is the network externalities that Dancey used to go on about - 3PPs plug into those, and reinforce them, but didn't create them. I think another reason is that the style of RPGing that has been most popular from the mid-80s on has been catered to be every approach to D&D since then with the exception of 4e. That style benefits from lush boxed sets, lush setting books, lush adventure and campaign guides. And only the biggest publishers have the resources to produce these - and so again there is a positive reinforcement mechanism that helps make one publisher dominant. Other publishers that have at various times been prominent - eg GDW with Traveller, ICE with RM/MERP, Chaosium with RQ and CoC, WW with Vampire - have found themselves able to replicate that model. The only publisher I know of at the moment who is doing that is Paizo, pursuant to the OGL, and are already in direct competition with WotC. Maybe there are others I'm ignorant of, who also have the wherewithal to capture a significant share of the D&D market by offering support for the same model. [/QUOTE]

Verification