Open Letter to WotC from Chris Dias

[BryonD]

Nope it is contradictory and creates confusion.

Obviously it is confusing you.

This point supports the premise that Wotc and Pathfinder have different target markets. Which means that they do not compete for market share.

No, it does not.

What you are saying now is that what you wanted to say all along is that Wotc and Paizo are competitors and both can claim a market share from a market that does not just belong to Wotc anymore.

What I am saying now, what I want to say, and what I've been saying all along are all the same thing.

These are two different arguments. If you were the Wotc CEO and your share holders asked you about the situation and any strategic parameters of it weighting on decisions to make you would have to be less confusing about this matter.

You are inserting false contexts into my comments that are not there. You are confusing yourself.

 

[BryonD]

Well, for my friends that prefer to play 3E over 4E, it is because they enjoy my DMing style and the campaigns I present. They enjoy the Friday nights we spend together.

Completely beside the point. It has been acknowledged on numerous occasions that people will get together and play whatever the group wants. But we are comparing system preference.


Do you pick completely random systems every time you get together? If system was truly completely meaningless, you would play GURPS, then Warhammer, then 4E, then FATAL, then 3E, etc... You would get the added bonus of variety.

The entirely reasonable reality of getting together with friends and being agreeable does not change the point that actual system preference plays into it.

And in the end that all comes out in the wash.
But that doesn't change the fact that removing PF from reality won't cause people who don't like 4E to become fans.

 

[BryonD]

For me the expectation have certainly changed. I don't buy many rulebooks anymore (actually AV1 was the last I bought). I really enjoy the use of DDi and WotC has effectively locked out competition from that resource. 3PP have more difficulty getting my money for rules that cannot integrate into the tool I mainly use to play 4E.

Sure, that makes sense.
But I don't think it is the only reason.

Look at Goodman, their #1 thing is adventures. And unless I misunderstand, they still will be. But even they seem to be having a much harder time. So the issue is not limited to DDI compatible elements.

 

[xechnao]

Obviously it is confusing you.

No, it does not.

What I am saying now, what I want to say, and what I've been saying all along are all the same thing.


You are inserting false contexts into my comments that are not there. You are confusing yourself.

Your post here it helps explain nothing. My impression is that you are trying to defend yourself just for the sake of defending it. Sorry but this post is totally empty for the sake of the argument.

 

[BryonD]

Your post here it helps explain nothing. My impression is that you are trying to defend yourself just for the sake of defending it. Sorry but this post is totally empty for the sake of the argument.

No. It is totally empty because explaining it five times already has proven the futility.

 

[BryonD]

Real simple:

#1) WotC made a game a lot of people did not like.
#2) Those people walked away from WotC.
#3) Those people will not go back to WotC as long as WotC is making a game they don't like.

That is all I've ever said.

It isn't complex to see how Paizo picking up those people has nothing to do with the above.
It isn't complex to see how neither Paizo's continued existence nor disappearance tomorrow would have anything to do with any of the above.



Now, if we dare get a wee bit complex: OF COURSE, there is some back and forth and some finite change. But that is just down in the small fractions. The big picture market positions are not changing based on that.

 

[xechnao]

What does that have to do with anything that I posted? I didn't discuss the "just continue publishing 3.5" option at all in my post.

You said:
"WotC could have gotten away with abandoning the OGL or they could have gotten away with publishing an entirely new fantasy RPG. They couldn't get away with doing both simultaneously."

You make a distinction here. The distinction is:
Either publish something new or abandon the OGL but not both at the same time.
Logically, this distinction means that if they abandon the OGL they should not publish something new, aka go on with what they were having going on, which is nothing else but 3.5e.

You appear to be suggesting that if 4E as it exists today had been released under the OGL that WotC would find itself in meaningful competition with some sort of bastardized 3E/4E hybrid. And that this hybrid would somehow be even more successful than Pathfinder is in the real world.

On what are you basing this conclusion?

Imagine if you could market your product as a game that has the best elements of 4e while retaining the more attractive ones of 3.5e and succeed in that. Very clearly, in this case 4e is at a disadvantage.

Right now some people prefer 4e over 3.5e because of how differently it manages to do certain things. Alas, this was 4e launch marketing campaign. Imagine if 4e could not claim this as a product.

 

[xechnao]

...Paizo picking up those people has nothing to do with the above.

It has a lot to do exactly for your point #3:

#3) Those people will not go back to WotC as long as WotC is making a game they don't like.

If it were not for Pathfinder, Wotc would stand a higher chance or, if you prefer, an easier time on this front. The front to win people (back). I tried to explain you why this happens to be so. If it is still unclear, I will try once again.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Okay you three - you have been going back and forth through most of this thread, over, and over, and over.

I agree with one of you.
I disagree with another.
A third is more or less backing up one of the other two.

But at this point I wish that all of you would just drop it.
Which I agree with and which I disagree with no longer matters, you have all said what you had to say. Several times over.

So please, would all of you drop it and turn to some other point, please? The other side is not going to get what you said, either because they just aren't wrapping their heads around it, are getting frustrated because they have said the same thing several times over, or are just being deliberately thick headed.

I feel like I am listening to an argument between fans of the Red Sox, the Yankees, and the Mets.

The Auld Grump, when obviously the Washington Senators are the best team....

 

[xechnao]

I disagree with another.

Yeah, so what exactly do you disagree with? That, for Wotc, following the OGL and having something like Pathfinder happen is not a matter of concern?

Sure, some people like you may think so. Wotc seems to think differently. And I think you will have to try really hard to be convincing on how the ability of a company to support an edition you want to abandon does not hamper your ability to get as many of your fans as possible to follow you to your next edition.