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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JustinA" data-source="post: 3719934" data-attributes="member: 51618">Scott Rouse obviously doesn't agree with you. Otherwise he wouldn't feel the need for the clarification.A quote from D&D Experience in February was posted in which a WotC rep state that:(1) They were not working on 4th Edition.(2) They had 3.5 products scheduled through 2008.Scott Rouse accepts responsibility for that quote, but clarifies it thus:"BTW that quote attributed to me at D&D Experience that you reference here was wrong. Most was right except I said we have a lot of great products through the end of the year (2007) not through 2008 as it was attributed." (this is from the link provided in the first message of this thread)Now if he was quoted correctly except for the second part of the statement (which should have read 2007 instead of 2008), then he was quoted correctly when he said that they were not working on 4th Edition.But Bill Slavicsek has said that they've been working on 4th Edition for "more than two years now". (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-9vMYGu0Q" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uj-9vMYGu0Q</a>)Now, unless Scott Rouse (D&D Brand Manager) was unaware in February that 4th Edition was being developed and had been under development for at least a year (probably two years), he lied.Now, let me be clear: This is not a personal slight on Scott Rouse. He undoubtedly had his marching orders. And I can fully understand a company policy of "we're not going to confirm or even say anything that might suggest that we're developing a new edition of the game until we're ready to announce it". For WotC it makes sense.But it doesn't change the fact that they lied.So, I don't feel the lie makes them a bad person. It was a business decision and I can understand the rationale behind that business decision.But, realistically, I'm not going to believe anything about 4th Edition until I have the books in my hands. WotC misled people about the backwards compatibility of the 3.5 revision when it was released and they lied about not having 4th Edition in development. As a fan, I'll judge 4th Edition on what actually appears in the books and nothing else. I think that's fair enough.And as a producer of third-party D20 products, I'm going to be very cautious in how I approach WotC in the future. I got burned as a freelancer with the 3.5 revision (to the point where I literally had to leave the industry for several years) and I'm getting burned by their mendacity on the plans for 4th Edition. (I took them at their word that a new edition wouldn't arrive until 2009 at the earliest and that I would, therefore, have the remainder of this year and at least the first quarter of next year to release 3.5 material without the specter of a new edition hanging over the marketplace. Obviously that isn't happening now and I'm forced to radically alter my business plan as a result.)In other words, I don't trust WotC as a fan and, as a business man, I not only don't expect WotC to do anything except in their own self-interest (which I never did anyway), but I will also make my plans under the assumption that I'm being blatantly lied to about their intentions at any given time (since they now have an established track record of doing so).I think that's fair, too.Justin Alexander<a href="http://www.thealexandrian.net" target="_blank">http://www.thealexandrian.net</a></blockquote>

Verification