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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rjdafoe" data-source="post: 5025620" data-attributes="member: 54591">No, I am not: From Wikipedia. October 2007: Jason Bulmahn began development of an updated system based on D&D 3.5, in part as a reaction to the waning support for the system in the wake of WotC's announcement of the upcoming 4E and in part as a reaction to the desire to improve on weaknesses in the D&D 3.5 game mechanics. 4E was announced in August of that same year. As I stated, development was started BEFORE any of the GSL mess. It also makes good business sense to take advantage of an edition change.  I think they would have Pathfinder regardless.  The GSL mess made it so they would not publish any 4E material.  Let me be clearer: I am not talking about the announcementod 4E. I am talking about when the OGL was first talked about at WotC. Back then, they KNEW that if they ever changed D&D too much for people or went back to a closed system, what the cost would be. This has nothing to do with whether 4E is open or not. They knew, up front, any deviance from an open system could cause a rift. They locked themselves in to possibly creating a split in the userbase, and I think they knew it. [ Yes, I did. Please don't tell me what I knew back then. If WotC decided to stop development in D&D, the game would live on. If the next version of D&D was a card game, the OGL version would live on, if the next version of D&D was 4E, the old game would live on, etc. They also knew that other companies could create their own tweak of the system. All of it could fracture the current customer base and fans of D&D. It doesn't matter wether the decision was right or wrong.  Or maybe I wasn't wrong and you did not understand what I wrote? Or i did not explain it as well as I could have?</blockquote>

Verification