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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 9508382" data-attributes="member: 22424">WotC have gone backwards and forwards a few times over the years in their attitudes to licensed content, both open licences like the OGL and closed ones like those Paizo used for the magazines. At the time 4e was in production, the anti-license faction was in the ascendancy, and so they pulled a lot of stuff back - they cancelled the d20 license, and let the Dragonlance license lapse. I forget whether they did the same with the Raveloft license, or if that had already expired.In the case of Dragon and Dungeon, they actually allowed Paizo an extension of a few months to allow the popular "Savage Tides" adventure path come to its end. But then those licenses were also ended.By that stage, print magazines were nowhere near profitable enough for a company the size of WotC, so they were never going to stay in print, but moving them online and into the D&D Insider package could have been a good move. Unfortunately, they then let them wither, largely because putting together a monthly magazine is a very significant chunk of work, and the return on investment just wasn't there. (It is, of course, difficult to determine just how much of a package deal like DDI can be attributed to any individual component, but WotC's estimate was that very few people subscribed for the magazines, rather than considering them a bonus. They were probably right about that.)It's an interesting question what would have happened had WotC not taken that path, and had instead renewed the licenses. My gut feeling is that 4e would have done somewhat better (as cancelling the licenses brought about Pathfinder, and turned D&D biggest cheerleader into its biggest competitor). However, I suspect it wouldn't have done hugely better, and I don't think 4e ever stood a chance of meeting WotC's expectations of that time.And it's entirely possible that 5e then wouldn't have done as well - it's likely that Pathfinder kept a chunk of people who didn't like 4e in the hobby, so that 5e could bring them back to D&D; without Pathfinder, they may simply have been gone.But that's all just a best guess.</blockquote>

Verification