Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Prime_Evil" data-source="post: 9218848" data-attributes="member: 11984">That is definitely a factor. Book sales always slump a bit in the period between when a new edition is announced and when it is released. But I suspect there may also be fatigue factor. A lot of people already have enough 5e material to keep them going for years. This tends to occur towards the end of an edition cycle. But releasing a significant update to the rules resets expectations. My concern is that OneDnD might not be enough of a change to reset the natural fatigue that develops as an edition gets older....My biggest fear is that OneDnD will introduce two major changes. The first is a hard pivot towards a subscription-based electronic platform. If so, this is probably where I get off the train. I don't mind paying a subscription for useful tools, but I will draw the line if they become essential to play the game.  I suspect Wizards are smart enough to avoid alienating sections their audience in this way, so I have a cautious hope they will avoid making this migration mandatory. Secondly, it was clear some factions within WoTC want to revisit licensing arrangements with the release of the 2024 update. My suspicion is that they won't try to terminate the OGL again - they got burned last time. Instead, I suspect they will simply not release any of the new material as OGC. This leaves third-party publishers out in the cold unless they enter a licensing agreement with WoTC. This strategy only works if the changes in the upcoming edition break backward compatibility. The design team were stressing the new edition was backwards compatible with published adventures (note this doesn't say sourcebooks...). But they haven't said anything more about this for months. I worry that marketing or legal may push the design team to make changes simply to break third-party compatibility. I would love to be proven wrong on this front though. A more positive outcome would be the release of an updated SRD under Creative Commons. But we don't know which way they are going to jump yet.</blockquote>

Verification