I'm to the point that I don't care when 4E gets announced.  Unless it's so much better that I have to have it, I'll stick it out with the stuff I already have.  Sure, I'll likely buy the 4E core rules, or at least look at them, but I don't play nearly enough to hit reset on my rules.

Quote from: blakkieEDIT:  Hasboro might prefer that D&D were a board game that hasn't changed it's rules in several decades, and keep chunging in sales with licensing added sales that just "skin" the actual game. But, well, it isn't a boardgame and it doesn't have the market target type to do that. .

The problem is that you're treating D&D like an rpg.  

It's so much more than that.  It's a decent sized brand.  The majority of the people in the U.S. have heard of it. They might be looking to springboard the name into licenses that produce money without the big overhead of a large game design division. The miniatures game is a limited example of moving in other directions.  Unfortunately, a previously outstanding deal allowed the D&D movie to be made (instead of a decent movie with the D&D   brand).  But there are lots of other possibilities for D&D and other bits of owned material.  

I believe the fiction line is actually more profitable that the rpg line.  Not surprising since there are more fantasy readers than roleplayers.  Inside sources from time have stated that it was actually issues with fiction publishing and not rpg publishing that killed TSR.  They tried to jump from 2 hardbacks a year to 10.  The market didn't step up and the book returns killed them.  

I never said that 4E would never come out.  It's just that Hasbro may not be in a hurry as the actual rpg isn't a big deal to them (If you look at their reports, WOTC on the whole is presented on the same scale as Mr. Potato Head.)  They have to think in terms of money made for investment.  Rushing 4E to market may not be the priority that so many people think it is.

Quote from: NicephorusThe problem is that you're treating D&D like an rpg.  

It's so much more than that.  It's a decent sized brand.  The majority of the people in the U.S. have heard of it. They might be looking to springboard the name into licenses that produce money without the big overhead of a large game design division. The miniatures game is a limited example of moving in other directions.  Unfortunately, a previously outstanding deal allowed the D&D movie to be made (instead of a decent movie with the D&D   brand).  But there are lots of other possibilities for D&D and other bits of owned material.  

I believe the fiction line is actually more profitable that the rpg line.  Not surprising since there are more fantasy readers than roleplayers.  Inside sources from time have stated that it was actually issues with fiction publishing and not rpg publishing that killed TSR.  They tried to jump from 2 hardbacks a year to 10.  The market didn't step up and the book returns killed them.  

I never said that 4E would never come out.  It's just that Hasbro may not be in a hurry as the actual rpg isn't a big deal to them (If you look at their reports, WOTC on the whole is presented on the same scale as Mr. Potato Head.)  They have to think in terms of money made for investment.  Rushing 4E to market may not be the priority that so many people think it is.

True, and I hope Hasbro can see this truth.  Having a good D&D game is not just for selling copies of a game, it's for developing a rather lucrative license.  IMO they'd be best served by making an RPG to make roleplayers happy, not worrying about bringing people into the hobby or whatever.  If the RPG community loves it then the D&D brand will continue to trickle into other areas, making them oodles of cash on minis, video game licenses, novels, and other sources of income.  From their perspective so long as they don't totally lose their ass on RPGs it's a worthwhile investment.  It could be looked at as development of the license rather than a seperate venture.

Of course I have no actual numbers to back anything up, this is just the feeling I have.

I, for one, like the idea of getting a new edition. I hope it has substantial differences from 3.x - differences as big as the differences between 2nd Ed and 3.x.

Why? Because it'll be a breath of fresh air. Something new and different to mix things up a bit. If I declare a new campaign with new rules and new books, all of a sudden we're all on the same footing again - even the powergamers. We're rushing into unfamiliar territory, finding new things, seeing how things interact, finding the min-max combos...

It's exciting to me. I don't worry about old stuff going obsolete, since I've discovered how ridiculously easy it is to import stuff from previous editions into 3.x (the trick is, by the way, not to get anal about exactly cooresponding power levels and statistics, but just to make up some rules that make the thing operate the way the flavor text describes it).

Quote from: gleichmanSo there's already talk about 4e... time flies and I'm feeling old.

Already? No, there's been talk of it going on 3 years now.

Quote from: Ragnarok N RollAlready? No, there's been talk of it going on 3 years now.

Fuck, there's been talk of 4e since the rumors of 3e first hit the internet.

Quote from: Ragnarok N RollAlready? No, there's been talk of it going on 3 years now.

I've been out of touch for a while.

Will WotC keep the OGL for 4e?

If not, they will split the market.  (Well, even more than otherwise.)  

Mongoose will make hardback versions of their existing 'pocket' PHs and GMGs.  Companies will continue to produce 'new' material for 3.5 (or some OLG-based 3.5 ersatz products).

Schisms have occurred before (e.g. the 'pre-3e' players who hang out at dragonsfoot.org versus the '3/3.5' players at ENWorld).  But unlike past schisms, companies will be able to continue to legally publish material for 3.5 (thanks to the OGL, which will never expire).

I would think that this schism would be quite large if 4e is even more 'minis-based' than 3.5.  (The trend towards minis being apparent in the move from 3e to 3.5 e.)

This might be okay with WotC if they figure that they  can make more money by marketing minis to the new 4e players than they will lose by the people decide who give the new edition a pass.

Quote from: AkrasiaWill WotC keep the OGL for 4e?

I predict they will keep the OGL, but strip it down badly. So that it's technically possible to use it to create suppliments, but there won't be a lot of the good stuff. That way WOTC can put out suppliments that are inherently superior to anything 3rd parties can come up with.

Either that, or the SRD will exist but along with some sort of licensing fee. Those who sell products might have to send a portion of the proceeds back to WOTC or something.

Quote from: blakkieIncidentally could someone explain to me why WotC would announce a 4th edition so far ahead?  Because i'd expect their 3.X sales to take a nose dive when they announce it as people hold off for 4th, not wanting to purchase a book that will be obsolete shortly. Or at least WotC is going to want a large percentage of people to expect their 3.X books to become obsolete because that would be an indication of a intent to purchase 4e.  Are they prepared to just suffer such a revenue gap in the interests of having a long marketing build-up?

They need time to secure preorders, among other things.

I think many of the OGL products (if 4E isn't open that is) will be derivative D20 systems like Mutants and Masterminds or AE more than new 3.5 material.  There will be OGL 3.5 material for certain, as long as people are still playing the game in enough numbers to make such product viable, but I think that we'll see more and more OGL line split off and try to make their own niche than anything else.  GR is already doing a great job of this, and it's likely to continue.

Quote from: kanegrundar...  GR is already doing a great job of this, and it's likely to continue.

GR's strategy with True20 suggests to me that there is a widespread suspicion  within 'the industry' that:
 
(a.) 4e is coming sooner rather than later (200/2008 rather than 2010); and

(b.) 4e will not be OGL (or highly restricted, in the manner suggested by Name_Lips).

I think you're right.  Yet at the same time even the folks at GR, Mongoose, WW and the rest are running on speculation.  No one not tied to WotC knows for certain when/if 4E is coming and if it's going to be open or not.  Going the OGL route without the D20 stamp is the safe bet to have a continuing product line that still allows publishers to publish D20 compatible material without having to worry about what WotC is going to do.

Quote from: AkrasiaGR's strategy with True20 suggests to me that there is a widespread suspicion  within 'the industry' that:
 
(a.) 4e is coming sooner rather than later (200/2008 rather than 2010); and

(b.) 4e will not be OGL (or highly restricted, in the manner suggested by Name_Lips).

I'm not so sure.  I get the feeling that True20 might be more a reaction to some of the sucky ass rules in 3.5, like the more and more tediously miniature-based combat rules.

It, and a lot of the other variants, strike me as having a primary motivation of "the current rules suck and I can damn well do better than that".  I think the hope is that they'll be able to strike out with their own branding (Powered by...), but I don't know that most of them are *expecting* to have a successful branding of their own.  Hoping, but not expecting.

That's something else that just came to mind...What's going to stop someone from using the OGL in it's current form to still support a 4th edition of D&D?  Unless 4E is so massively different that it uses a totally different dice mechanic, I could see companies skirting the edges by making OGL products with mechanics that either compliment or copy the new edition.  As long as they are smart about it, they could still make proudcts that would work with the new edition.  They just couldn't say that they are made for use with 4E (which could be a problem in it's own right).