Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Psion" data-source="post: 2391745" data-attributes="member: 172">I'll trust that you have the right of how things would proceed in your particular academic environment.But I think you may have a bit of a faulty point of reference. I, instead, would compare this to smack talk in professional sports. There are predictions and posturing, some of which is based on previous track records, but such predictions are often wrong and dark horses often come forth.That said, if those 2004 numbers someone posted are accurate, then I don't know that Mearls claims are outlandish. It's WotC, WW, and &quot;everybody else&quot;. At least a few years ago, non-WotC d20 was collectively easily pulling in a double digit take of the market share, but now, that only two &quot;mainly d20&quot; companies were even worth mentioning; all other companies on the list that did d20 have largely withdrawn from it.Hmmm... do I smell a rhetorical pre-emptive strike of some sort?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Psion, post: 2391745, member: 172"] I'll trust that you have the right of how things would proceed in your particular academic environment. But I think you may have a bit of a faulty point of reference. I, instead, would compare this to smack talk in professional sports. There are predictions and posturing, some of which is based on previous track records, but such predictions are often wrong and dark horses often come forth. That said, if those 2004 numbers someone posted are accurate, then I don't know that Mearls claims are outlandish. It's WotC, WW, and "everybody else". At least a few years ago, non-WotC d20 was collectively easily pulling in a double digit take of the market share, but now, that only two "mainly d20" companies were even worth mentioning; all other companies on the list that did d20 have largely withdrawn from it. Hmmm... do I smell a rhetorical pre-emptive strike of some sort? [/QUOTE]

Verification