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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thecasualoblivion" data-source="post: 4836087" data-attributes="member: 59096">You say that the fracturing of the D&D community was inevitable and WotC should have seen it coming. I agree with that statement, and I'll go one further and say that WotC did see it coming. WotC isn't stupid, and 4E was too deliberately designed for me to believe otherwise. This makes me believe that WotC felt they had a good reason to disenfranchise grognards, OGL fans, and people who favored the toolbox/customizable aspect of 3E. I would speculate that WotC decided based on their research that those groups were not a large part of their core audience and that keeping those people happy meant serving their core audience less. Serving the core audience was more important than keeping the fringes happy, and while this would fracture the community a stronger focus on core would more than make up for the loss.You also mention that the fracturing is bad for the community. I don't think thats entirely true. Its definitely bad for the people who got left behind, but to the silent unwashed masses of the core audience, we get a game that better serves our needs. Clark Peterson didn't say 4E wasn't selling well, he said that the 3pp community under 4E isn't selling well. Like a lot of ENWorld, Clark doesn't separate 3pp from D&D, and he speaks about the two interchangably when they are not in the same boat.Joe Goodman didn't say anything besides that 4E isn't selling as well as the top two years of D&D sales. You're statement takes things a bit farther than what he said.</blockquote>

Verification