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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 4691149" data-attributes="member: 1106">I suspect that they're trying to emulate Games Workshop: sell them stuff for a year or two, then make their stuff obsolete.  Don't try to retain your old customers; they weren't buying much anymore anyway, and some will hang on and buy more.  Hey, it works for selling miniatures, and 4E is clearly designed to do that.So far as I can see, Eberron turned out to be what I suspected it was: a manifesto on what the current design team believed about D&D, and a harbinger of what was to come (the direction the game was going in).  I disagreed with many of the underlying assumptions and philosophies behind Eberron, and can see it mirrored in 4E and what was done to FR.  You're right that less will be done to Eberron, because apart from what will be required to bring it into line with the quirky and arbitrary 4E implied setting, it already reflects what WOTC believe about D&D.That's all fine for Theoretical Land, but unfortunately for your argument we live in the real world, which has a history and expectations connected to certain branding.  WOTC's problem is that they want to have their cake and eat it: the sales of D&D and FR from the name and logo, but without enough of the hallmarks of the brand that make it deserving of that title.  Yes it would have been better received if it was Donjons & Dragonborn and the Misbegotten Regions, but without the D&D and FR names, those games would probably sink into the morass of RPG sales mediocrity without much trace.  You probably wouldn't even bother to get on the bandwagon with "Poison Ivy Press" if those names weren't involved.  And what you're being told here is that the new product doesn't do what it says on the tin.</blockquote>

Verification