Aaron2 said:
As the market leader, D&D gets a high percentage of RPG sales regardless of what is driving the market. At least that's what Ryan Dancy's research found. So, even if V:TM is was creating the buzz in the market, D&D sales increased.
Are you sure you've got this right? If so, do you have a source? My understanding is that that is a hypothesis, the definition of the Skaff Effect.
And, remember, the Skaff Effect is not some tried-and-true multi-decade old theorem of market economies--it's a theory proposed by someone at TSR/WotC, whose background and training i have no idea about (and to explain D&D's market dominance, IIRC). IOW, it comes from the same people who're telling us that the reason the market behaves the way it does is because of the Skaff Effect. And is as much effect as cause. It might be a self-fulfilling prophecy, or even just circular reasoning.
While it might be possible for a group to play multiple d20 games without ever buying a PHB, I just don't see it happening. Gamers tend to be collectors first.
I wouldn't say collectors
first. Most play first, then buy a game or two because they're playing it, and then
some become game collectors, some become multi-game-players, and some become both. Many only ever play a handful of RPGs, and may or may not buy rules for all of them. At least, that seems to be what WotC's research says, and that's one part that accords with my experiences and conversations with others. [Another part of the WotC survey that seems to get glossed over, and also accords with my experiences, is that those who only play one RPG drop out of the hobby sooner, and spend less money while they're in the hobby--the "best" customers play multiple games, though the modal number is between 2 and 3, IIRC.]
Also, while newbies tend to play what's offered, more experienced gamers tend to be somewhat fussy. I would never again voluntarily play D&D3[.5]E, now that i've gotten to know it pretty well. But there're at least half-a-dozen D20 System games i'd gladly play, given the opportunity. And if i were to run, say, Babylon 5 D20, i'd probably have players who don't own D&D books, and i certainly wouldn't expect them to buy a PH. With the easy availability of the D20SRD, i'd expect that's true of others, too. At least, i seriously doubt that a non-gamer fan of B5 who wants to try an RPG is gonna go buy both the B5 rulebook and the D&D rulebook. In short, if you don't like D&D, or just simply have no interest in it, you might very well play [several] other D20 System games without owning a D&D PH. And, as time goes by, this gets more and more likely. Especially as more licensed properties get turned into games, because these are the most likely to be advertised in places where non-D&D-players might find out about them.
As for 4e. I'd be suprised if it wasn't OGL since they would have a hard time getting players to migrate. WotC relies on 3rd parties to developed the stuff that they need but isn't cost effective to do themselves (adventures, questionable licenses etc).
While i agree with you, the point that they might decide a more controlled licensing scheme, rather than an un-policed royalty-free trademark license, is better for them is valid. Given the way they're going, with the ever-tightening nature of the D20STL, it is not unreasonable to suspect that.
I really hope this isn't the case. As OGL product stray further and further from D&D, I lose interest. I'm a huge REH fan but passed on Conan because they changed too much (esp. since I don't agree with most of the changes). Same with Judge Dredd. Unfortunately, we'll never know how well a d20 Conan would have sold if it was compatable and balanced for normal D&D play. I would have bought it.
Just remember that you are not the whole market. Frex, in general, the further it strays from D&D3[.5]E, the more likely i am to like it, IME. I rather dislike a lot of elements of D&D3[.5]E that aren't inherent to its D20 System underpinnings, so changes are often for the better. Thus, i prefer Spycraft and Arcana Unearthed vastly to the current D&D. And precisely
because they are different, rather than
despite the differences.
Of course,
i'm not the whole market either. Rather, it's good to recognize that there are diversities. And don't forget the converse to your complaint: the people who wonder if such-n-such D20 System game would've done better if it hadn't slavishly stuck to D&D3E, mechanically. In this, as in many matters of taste, you just can't win: there'll always be people who think it's not different/original/whatever enough, and people who think it's too different/changed/whatever.
