Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Setanta" data-source="post: 1495069" data-attributes="member: 2183">Monte was saying that the split in player base between 3.0 and 3.5 would hurt the industry. The split would be greater if 4E were closed, because its rules presumably wouldn't be compatable with 3.x (or at least less compatable than 3.5 is with 3.0). I think we can agree that 3.5 has caused a split; there are plenty of threads here and on other boards to that effect. If 4E came out closed there would be people who wouldn't move because it's too soon, they don't like the changes, they don't want to buy the books, and all the other reasons some people haven't switched to 3.5. Throw in the fact that some people would refuse to support a closed 4E simply because it's closed. That right there would make it a bigger split than 3.5 caused. Now, the split would also have a larger effect on publishers. With 3.5, really, publishers can make 3.5 stuff, and the people still using 3.0 have at most a very small amount of conversion work to do. If 4E is closed, they'll have three choices:1- Only address the part of the market still playing 3.x.2- Get a license to produce 4E stuff, and ignore the 3.x players3- Get a license and dual-stat, which annoys lots of people who don't like paying for stats they won't use. I'm sure you can agree that all three are bad. If you made a D20 product, and it was your whole source of income, would you be happy about people OCRing the whole thing on day one of its release and posting it on the web? Sure, you'd go into the whole thing knowing that such an event was a possibility, but still, wouldn't you rather they at least wait a while, a month or two at least? Or would you have released it as crippled OGC, or possibly avoided the need to use much OGC by not bothering with a hugh-crunch content book? What if crunch was the only thing you felt you could contribute that would sell?</blockquote>

Verification