Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Turjan" data-source="post: 2504264" data-attributes="member: 3477">An "old" OGL stays an old OGL. Many people won't buy a product that's obviously "out of date", and you won't get them with facts like "but this is nearly the same!". They want 100% compatible. That's why companies want to use the d20STL. I often hear that those products sell much better than comparable products with just the OGL logo. You don't have to search for it; just look around on EN World! You will see enough posts that say exactly that: the only company producing "quality" is WotC, and these people only consider product that meets exact D&D 3.5 specification, everything else is worthless. That's not my opinion, but it's very common, and as funny as it is, it's even common on this d20 board. Green Ronin produced "Blue Rose" as softcover, because they didn't expect it to sell.Perhaps, perhaps not. This depends a bit on the newest numbers. It might be intelligent to make 4.0 OGL and to bind the customers of competitors to the own product. A restricted d20 STL might serve this purpose well. An OGL? Maybe. I'm not refusing to acknowledge the importance of a thriving hobby market. If the facts that Charles Ryan reported are true, WotC has been able to absorb the customers from the small d20 companies into their own customer base. This sounds a little bit as if the d20 market served its purpose. I'm really not saying any more than that: It's not sure how WotC sees its chances of keeping their customers together on their own.In principle you are right when you see players of C&C and True20 as part of their potential customer base. It depends how they see their chances to get this part of the hobby to return to the "source" <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />.I agree. That's why I made that WW remark before <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />. And as you are talking specifically about "d20 stuff", this falls well within my own statements <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.</blockquote>

Verification