D&D 4E Would you buy 4E if it were not open/had no licenses for 3rd party companies?

[Mistwell]

Wow, less than 7% care if it's fully open, and in an internet poll involving many small publishers who are directly impacted by the issue. I guess that answers the question as to whether people really care a lot about this issue!

 

[I'm A Banana]

You don't "NEED" anything beyond the first three books of any edition of D&D to run a fun game. Your pity is misplaced.

No one NEEDS to go on roller coasters, either, but I kind of pity those who don't.

Maybe I'll be doing more of that if 4e is totally closed. Certainly, I won't need any new core books.

 

[Zil]

Wow, less than 7% care if it's fully open, and in an internet poll involving many small publishers who are directly impacted by the issue. I guess that answers the question as to whether people really care a lot about this issue!

I don't think that's really a fair interpretation. You'd need a somewhat different question to draw the conclusion you stated. All this poll says is that only a small number of people who responded plan to not buy 4E if it does not have the 3.5 OGL (or equivalent) license). While probably not a majority, I suspect a significant minority of people do care, but what they are saying is that they'll buy the 4E game even if it does become more "closed source".

Heck, I'm one of those who does care a lot and even I had to put myself down in the "I'm not sure" group because even though I wouldn't be happy about it, I might still buy 4E in the end just to see the final system.

 

[mxyzplk]

I think that more than 20% of about 500 voters saying they won't buy 4e unless it's partly or totally open is significant, especially on such a slavishly Wizards-loving environment as ENWorld. Heck, the responses on the Wizards boards haven't been as fanatic in their justification of closedness as those here have.

 

[Orcus]

This is really interesting:

Openness doesn’t matter: 307
Openness matters: 121
Not going 4E: 59
Not sure: 24

The margin for those who dont care about openness to those who do (to some degree) is almost only 2:1. That is pretty significant.

Plus, reading posts by the people who say they are buying 4E regardless a lot of them say that they would prefer third party support--to me that means they will buy the books, but if you want to keep them as long term customers you need to allow third party support. Sure, a good chunk say they dont care at all.

I'll tell you what. I think Necro helps bring those 121 over and I also think I bring a good chunk of the 59 over who say they wont go 4E (Frankly, I think that number is underrepresented here). We were solidly able to do that for 3E. I cant tell you how many emails I got from people saying "we werent going to go 3E at all, then we found [Wizard's Amulet or Tome of Horrors or Tomb of Abysthor or whatever] and that made us give it a try and now we love it!"

Strangely, I think the comments by people who say "we dont care about third parties" actually helps strengthen the argument to release the rules openly--because those guys dont care. They will only buy Wizards stuff no matter what, meaning no one could argue that Wizards would ever lose a sale to a 3P book with that crew (frankly, I think that is poor reasoning anyway and doesnt happen, but I know some are concerned about that). As for the "wont buy if not open" crew, open that up and you get more sales.

Of course, internet polls are hardly good market research. But I think this confirms alot of what I believe:

*A big chunk of people buy the game no matter what. Easily more than half, in my view.
*A relevant chunk wont buy it if it isnt open. I always figured it was around 25%, and it is funny to see these poll numbers right about there.
*An overlapping chunk of the two groups (some of those who buy regardless and most of those who wont if it isnt open) would have bought and would stay with D&D longer if they have other non-Wizards options (its just a gamer thing).
*I think I can speak to those people who say they arent going 4E at all. I did for 3E, no reason why we cant do it again.
*Those who only buy core books, it doesnt matter if Wizards opens the rules to third parties, since those people only buy core anyway. No chance of any argument that a third party book is taking Wizards sales.
*Those who want third party support mostly want adventures and settings and stuff like that, but they trust Wizards for the splat books and the core campaign materials. Once again, a perfect fit.

This is an interesting poll.

While I love this poll, the question isnt who wont buy (though that is an interesting number), the question is for those who do buy how many prefer having third party support and how many feel they will stay with D&D longer if third party support is allowed?

But its not my thread, its your thread

Clark

 

[Orcus]

Wow, less than 7% care if it's fully open, and in an internet poll involving many small publishers who are directly impacted by the issue. I guess that answers the question as to whether people really care a lot about this issue!

That is a crazy interpretation.

I'd look at it this way: nearly 50% as many people wont buy it without openness as would buy it no matter what.

 

[Crashy75]

Well, I'd still buy it but I'd be very disappointed. So, while I voted "I would purchase 4E even if it were completely closed", I still would care. A lot.

EDIT:

...
While I love this poll, the question isnt who wont buy (though that is an interesting number), the question is for those who do buy how many prefer having third party support and how many feel they will stay with D&D longer if third party support is allowed?

But its not my thread, its your thread

Clark

I'm not sure. I like the different directions that other companies take me and so I'd probably be distracted with something else at some point. It is very possible that I could be led astray if there was no 3rd party support. After all, I do have a somewhat short attention span.

 

[Imban]

Wow, less than 7% care if it's fully open, and in an internet poll involving many small publishers who are directly impacted by the issue. I guess that answers the question as to whether people really care a lot about this issue!

I don't care all that much if it's fully open. It... would bug me, but I think the only company that I've really liked the third-party work of that couldn't pay for a reasonably-priced license would be Dreamscarred Press, with their PDF psionics supplements, some of which (Untapped Potential and Mind Divine, I'm looking at you) are among the best splatbooks I have for 3.5e D&D. Most all other PDF stuff is not really superior to the stuff on the WotC boards - better organized and possibly a little better-edited, but the WotC board stuff is free and typically of about the same quality and quantity, and I can go ask the writer himself if he was drunk or just stoned when he wrote this rule this way and probably get a good answer very quickly.

I would be very disappointed and probably be much less satisfied with my choice to purchase 4e if only WotC could produce content for it that's more than occasional forum threads - no more 160-page splatbooks or the equivalent on anything except what WotC thinks will sell to the D&D Audience at Large. However, I can't say with honesty that the announcement would cause me to not buy 4e. It would drastically cut the amount of fun I have with the game, but it wouldn't impact that decision.

For the record, the other RPGs I play on a semi-regular basis are Mutants & Masterminds 2nd Edition, which is open-licensed (I believe), though as I've never seen the need for any products for it past the corebook, Mastermind's Manual, and Ultimate Power, the open license hasn't really done me any good, and Exalted, which is completely closed and, due to its nature as a game system focused on a single proprietary setting, I respect that decision and don't feel that an open license or licensed products would provide any value.

I was always a fan of netbooks and fan publications back when AD&D 2nd Edition was the game of the day, so I can honestly say I've always been a fan and supporter of third-party support for Dungeons and Dragons, and likely I always will be.

 

[Orcus]

One could simply say, hey Wizards look at this:

Of 511 possible sales:

If it is not open at all:
Buying 4E: 307
Not buying for lack of openness: 121
Not going 4E at all: 59
Not sure: 24

With openness and presuming third party publishers can sway people like we did for 3E from the "not going" and “undecided” crowd, like I did for 3e:
Buying 4E: 461 (all the "not buying for lack of openness" are now buyers!)
Not going 4E: 40 (I presumed we could swing 19 of the 59)
Not sure: 10 (I presumed we could swing 14 of the 24).

For every 500 possible buyers, do you want 307 actual sales, or do you want 461?

(heck, even if you presume we cant sway a single "not going" or "unsure', its still 428/500 instead of 307/500).

Clark

 

[MaelStorm]

I want 4E so I said: Yes even if there is no openness. I'm not going to boycott 4E if its not open, but I'm going to be disappointed if they are really stiff and not opening up to third party support in the future. I'm looking forward Necromancer's Advanced Player's Guide.