Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Necromancer Games-update by Orcus
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="tomlib" data-source="post: 4836066" data-attributes="member: 76894"><p><strong>Revenue</strong></p><p></p><p>I think this is an interesting topic beyond the ramifications of Wizards of the Coast (WotC) and Third Party Publishers (3PP). The question here, at least as I see it, relates to an open license versus a closed one.</p><p> </p><p>In this case WotC has a product, 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons. Are they better off allowing other people to produce and sell material for this product in addition to their own or are they better off keeping it all in house and forcing other companies to create their own systems?</p><p> </p><p>At first glance, I think the latter (closed license) seems to be the winner. Why should WotC allow anyone else to sell product for their system which might well cut into their own sales?</p><p> </p><p>However, upon deeper inspection I think (my opinion) that the former (open license) generates far more interest, more creativity, more product, better ideas, and a better overall 4th Edition experience for everyone. This better experience will drive increased sales for all parties. A worse experience will dampen all sales even if only one company is selling. A bigger share of a smaller market versus a smaller share of a bigger market argument.</p><p> </p><p>Let's imagine WotC worked out an open license 18 months before releasing 4th Edition and that upon release dozens of companies and even individuals had product available. I think (my opinion) we wouldn't be seeing edition wars. I think the changeover would have been rapid and well received. (Personally I like many of the changes in 4th Edition particularly in regards to high level play).</p><p> </p><p>I equate this to a Wikipedia versus Encyclopedia Britannica debate. I absolutely believe that an open system, with as great a range of contributers providing a wide array of ideas promotes the widest distribution of a product. I think (my opinion again) that 3PP help WotC tremendously by attracting an audience to a wide variety of product.</p><p> </p><p>Another example might be the automobile market when going well the big boys make more money even though there are many smaller companies producing cars as well.</p><p> </p><p>Finally, from a purely selfish respect, an open license provides me with a greater variety of material (some of it dreck to be certain) and that can only be to my benefit.</p><p> </p><p>Anyway, happy gaming all.</p><p> </p><p>Tom</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="tomlib, post: 4836066, member: 76894"] [b]Revenue[/b] I think this is an interesting topic beyond the ramifications of Wizards of the Coast (WotC) and Third Party Publishers (3PP). The question here, at least as I see it, relates to an open license versus a closed one. In this case WotC has a product, 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons. Are they better off allowing other people to produce and sell material for this product in addition to their own or are they better off keeping it all in house and forcing other companies to create their own systems? At first glance, I think the latter (closed license) seems to be the winner. Why should WotC allow anyone else to sell product for their system which might well cut into their own sales? However, upon deeper inspection I think (my opinion) that the former (open license) generates far more interest, more creativity, more product, better ideas, and a better overall 4th Edition experience for everyone. This better experience will drive increased sales for all parties. A worse experience will dampen all sales even if only one company is selling. A bigger share of a smaller market versus a smaller share of a bigger market argument. Let's imagine WotC worked out an open license 18 months before releasing 4th Edition and that upon release dozens of companies and even individuals had product available. I think (my opinion) we wouldn't be seeing edition wars. I think the changeover would have been rapid and well received. (Personally I like many of the changes in 4th Edition particularly in regards to high level play). I equate this to a Wikipedia versus Encyclopedia Britannica debate. I absolutely believe that an open system, with as great a range of contributers providing a wide array of ideas promotes the widest distribution of a product. I think (my opinion again) that 3PP help WotC tremendously by attracting an audience to a wide variety of product. Another example might be the automobile market when going well the big boys make more money even though there are many smaller companies producing cars as well. Finally, from a purely selfish respect, an open license provides me with a greater variety of material (some of it dreck to be certain) and that can only be to my benefit. Anyway, happy gaming all. Tom [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Necromancer Games-update by Orcus
Top