A hole dug for them by the OGL.

Quote from: Skywalker;581565A hole dug for them by the OGL.

Hardly. More like a hole dug by promoting their latest offering like the one true Kool-Aid and shitting all over loyal fans of past products.

Its perfectly fine to get behind a new product. Telling your long time fans that all your old stuff is shit is NOT a winning way to do so.

Quote from: Skywalker;581565A hole dug for them by the OGL.

If this were true, why hasn't Paizo^2 emerged and produced Pathfinder^2 to do to Pathfinder what Pathfinder did to Dungeons & Dragons?

Why was D&D 3.5 able to convert many (most?) of the 3e players?  It faced competition from many, many other games with very similar rules?

I think that MMOs did far more to hurt D&D than the OGL did (well, to be honest I don't think the OGL hurt D&D at all, in fact I think it was critical to its renaissance).

But Wizards of the Coast dug their own hole, starting with the day they said "we are not working on 4th edition" when they were, followed by the day they said "we will not announce 4th edition this year" when they knew they would, and capped off when they said "there will be an Open Game license for use with 4th edition" when they were clearly unwilling to create one.

Everything after that was just post script.

Quote from: RSDancey;581568If this were true, why hasn't Paizo^2 emerged and produced Pathfinder^2 to do to Pathfinder what Pathfinder did to Dungeons & Dragons?

Paizo has moved on from Pathfinder yet. If they dropped Pathfinder for a significantly altered edition, then I am certain this would be a risk for them (and one they would know all to well).

I also suspect that there is no room at this point for a 3rd WotC or Paizo until one of them has left the room. Arguably there isn't even room for 2

Quote from: RSDancey;581568Why was D&D 3.5 able to convert many (most?) of the 3e players?  It faced competition from many, many other games with very similar rules?

The movement from 3e to 3.5e was not without issues, but it was a lot less of a jump than 3.5e to 4e. I don't think they are comparable.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;581567Hardly. More like a hole dug by promoting their latest offering like the one true Kool-Aid and shitting all over loyal fans of past products.

That approach sucks and did not do WotC any favours for sure (though I don't think the approach isolated to the shift from 3.5e->4e). Though such douchebaggery had a negative impact on 4e, I think it had much less to do with the hole that WotC now finds itself in than the OGL does.

The real problem Hasbro has with D&D is that the BRAND is damaged.  At a moment when fantasy has never been more in positive light (Game of Thrones, Jackson LoTR, WoW, Nerds taking over, etc) the D&D product line is languishing in mire literally, no literally- splintered fanabse, a very empty new product line, competitors who are defending their brands more successfully than they are.  a 38 year old brand should also have some cool ancillary products- where are they?

There is an interesting interview between the Tome Show host and a Wotc rep from GenCon that is pure corporate speak, product product product, we want to get back to story and players, product product product.  I think the podcast is here:  

http://thetome.podbean.com/2012/09/01/end-of-con-interview-gencon-2012/

After getting a newly refurbished D&D brand as a throw in on the Wotc deal, Hasbro has let it slide into disrepair.  The fact that we have at least another year of playtesting before 5e is launched shows that Mearls et al are showing some foresight about the legacy of the brand, rather than just the short term bottom line.  Maybe they can salvage the mess they created.  I just don't know, the creatives seem to have have the power at the moment- no significant revenue for a year and half(!!!) while they try to publicly create the perfect D&D for 40 years of players and the future, but will they be able to have such control after launch?

I think it is pretty interesting.

Cheers

Quote from: Teazia;581597the creatives seem to have have the power at the moment- no significant revenue for a year and half(!!!)

That's what the reprints and pdfs are for, to
1.) Show Hasbro that the interest in D&D is a larger fanbase then 4e.
2.) To bring the non-4e audience back to WotC, a lengthy playtest is needed.
It's all about breathing room.

Quote from: CRKrueger;581612That's what the reprints and pdfs are for, to
1.) Show Hasbro that the interest in D&D is a larger fanbase then 4e.
2.) To bring the non-4e audience back to WotC, a lengthy playtest is needed.
It's all about breathing room.

Agree. It's a significant mental shift for WotC but there is now good commercial sense in putting its back catalogue into print rather than try and force everyone to play a single edition, especially when they have lost any ability to stop their customers choosing those other editions or myriad of other options that are available thanks to the OGL. If you are giving your IP away for free to everyone else, you should at least try and make money on it yourself

Quote from: Skywalker;581627Agree. It's a significant mental shift for WotC but there is now good commercial sense in putting its back catalogue into print rather than try and force everyone to play a single edition, especially when they have lost any ability to stop their customers choosing those other editions or myriad of other options that are available thanks to the OGL. If you are giving your IP away for free to everyone else, you should at least try and make money on it yourself

The beauty of it is, with the OGL, the community is self sustaining even with negligent stewardship from Wotc.  The owner of TSR/3x D&D can always cash in on this community because if they had their druthers, the community would probably prefer to be using the original material legally (not in all cases and this resistance may be strongest in the PF crowd).  The longer the owner waits to capitalize on this though, it is possible the more their potential mindshare and marketability slips.  

How much money would it take to buy Dungeons & Dragons?  This might be the perfect time.  With no revenue to speak of for at least 12 months, a backcatalog of questionable worth (based on prior pdf sales data), a splintered fan base, and the prospect of significantly more investment investment before a meaningful return is realized.  It may not be as much as we think.  If one gives Wotc a 5 year window of both limited rights to the brand and electronic gaming rights, this may even be more possible.  

Also, someone needs to get the movie rights back from the current slackjawwed owners, buying them off/profit sharing is a worthy cause.

Yeah, I agree that the OGL has been good for the hobby. It was just bad for WotC. Its adoption in 2000 was badly fumbled (and this was when the hole was dug) and this led to the desperate attempt in 2008 to try and recover from that mistake (and this was when WotC fell into that hole).

Quote from: Teazia;581642...the community would probably prefer to be using the original material legally...

True. Though this inherent brand strength is likely to dissipate over time.

Quote from: Skywalker;581646Yeah, I agree that the OGL has been good for the hobby. It was just bad for WotC. Its adoption in 2000 was badly fumbled (and this was when the hole was dug).

I honestly can't tell if you're serious.  Impressive.

Quote from: Skywalker;581646Yeah, I agree that the OGL has been good for the hobby. It was just bad for WotC. Its adoption in 2000 was badly fumbled (and this was when the hole was dug) and this led to the desperate attempt in 2008 to try and recover from that mistake (and this was when WotC fell into that hole).

I'd quibble here, because it seems more like the OGL was great for the hobby and WotC with D&D while the OGL was bad for Hasbro when they bought out WotC because they tried to stuff the genie back in the bottle instead of embracing it.

Quote from: jeff37923;581705I'd quibble here, because it seems more like the OGL was great for the hobby and WotC with D&D while the OGL was bad for Hasbro when they bought out WotC because they tried to stuff the genie back in the bottle instead of embracing it.

The mistake was to try to put the genie back in the bottle. The OGL was a boon for WotC. It's the execs that followed that were morons to the point they thought they could roll back the OGL and the fandom would just follow "because WotC".

Quote from: Benoist;581711The mistake was to try to put the genie back in the bottle. The OGL was a boon for WotC. It's the execs that followed that were morons to the point they thought they could roll back the OGL and the fandom would just follow "because WotC".

Well, WOTC DOES include wizards. Just sayin.

Quote from: jeff37923;581705I'd quibble here, because it seems more like the OGL was great for the hobby and WotC with D&D while the OGL was bad for Hasbro when they bought out WotC because they tried to stuff the genie back in the bottle instead of embracing it.

WotC definitely benefitted from the OGL in the early years of 3e. However, without a plan for what came next, it was a shortsighted benefit for WotC as history has proven.

As I said above, WotC putting the genie back in the bottle was definitely a mistake. But it would have caused a lot less harm had the OGL (the hole) not happened.