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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5453498" data-attributes="member: 957">You are talking two different points.  Which is fine, but it is important to note.You list four examples of types of people.  I don't dispute any of those.  But I would point out that none of the really contradict the idea that system preference is key.I don't remotely claim it is the one and only issue.  But it is the 800 pound gorilla of the issues.  The world ain't black and white, but sometimes certain issues come pretty close, and this is one of them.The OGL is another matter.I agree that without the OGL Wizards would not face the current Pathfinder competition.  I do not then leap to the conclusion that PF fans would instead play 4E.  I think that is a wild, unfounded, and even unlikely presumption.  Again, I know a lot of people who knew they were not going to go to to 4E before they knew PF was an option.  So clearly PF had zero impact on their selection.  And I also know people who have left 4E because they decided it didn't hold their interest.At best you are claiming a lack of OGL would simply make people play a second choice by denying them their best choice.  Perhaps a good market move, but as a gamer, that sucks.  Do YOU want to deny choice to other gamers?But even all that aside, roll the clock back to 1999.  WotC made a ton of money on 3E.  And OGL was part of that.  Yeah, we can argue if they would have made more or less, but the facts are it was there and they did well.  So it is very hard for me to see how you can justify that it was not a great choice at that time.Now, when they did 4E they choose to reject the OGL.  I think THAT was a mistake.  (To be clear, I think the markt they choose to target with the design philosophy was the BIG mistake, but fighting the OGL was also a mistake.)  A choice that had been made nearly a decade earlier was now simply part of the market reality.  I think WotC may have over-rated their position and assumed they could just bully the market using the D&D brand name.  They were wrong and THAT was a mistake.  Just because the OGL was there did not mean they were obligated to throw themselves into its teeth.  They had good business choices available and they did not make them in this case.But, I think people will play the game they like.  And I don't think trying to wave that away with simple accusations of being "black and white" change it.But, we can disagree.  <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