Reading the OOP board you get the feeling that many of them have no interest in 3E nor 4E. By making them a part of the overall board you are throwing a match on the pile of oily rags. You will have 3E and 4E people start arguments with the 2E and 1E people which isn't the purpose of many of the OOP posts. Let them have their forum, to do otherwise is really a divisive maneuver whether you realize it or not.
We created an entire set of forums for the discussion of previous editions of D&D.
This is to wilfully ignore the nature of this complaint. I understand you guys don't see the point in devoting resources to games you aren't supporting, but at least recognise that not all out of print versions of D&D are the same. The signal to noise ratio in the new out of print forums is not going to be very high for some people.
Personally, I could care less, as Dragonsfoot and the numerous other OoP websites are probably better suited to this in any case.
yeah another big crap on the OOP guys, 1st the world forums now THIS!!! WOTC must really love their customer base!
If you're playing in Other Worlds or using out of print games, you're not really a part of the customer base now, are you?
We created an entire set of forums for the discussion of previous editions of D&D.
You missed the point GamerZero. I think there should be the forums for previous editions that are for 3rd and one completely for perhaps Really Out of Print. Many of the guys who posted on the previous OOP forum hate or won't touch 3E. So to lump them in with the 3E guys and call it previous editions is cruel and unusual. And as Wotc holds the license to the earlier editions, they should provide space for those who still play the earlier editions. Its good customer service. Just because you don't produce it anymore doesn't negate your obligation to the customer.
You missed the point GamerZero. I think there should be the forums for previous editions that are for 3rd and one completely for perhaps Really Out of Print. Many of the guys who posted on the previous OOP forum hate or won't touch 3E. So to lump them in with the 3E guys and call it previous editions is cruel and unusual. And as Wotc holds the license to the earlier editions, they should provide space for those who still play the earlier editions. Its good customer service. Just because you don't produce it anymore doesn't negate your obligation to the customer.
I agree with you. We have certain levels of activity that we need to aim for in each of our forums so they do not appear to be unused. I'm on board with making a forum for any topic as long as it will generate enough discussion.
The trouble is that forums with only a few active threads per week tend to end up losing critical mass, as many people will stop visiting them. On the other hand, I understand that no one wants to wade through a bunch of stuff they don't like to get to the content they DO like. So it's a tough situation where we can't have it both ways.
But if there is enough traffic, we'll make more forums.
If you're playing in Other Worlds or using out of print games, you're not really a part of the customer base now, are you?
well concidering I own 3 and 3.5 and planned on purchasing 4e, well until now it seems, pretty much makes your post worthless, in an attempt to point how I am not a custumer now doesn't it.
No wonder your customers are leaving in droves. The blatant disregard with which you toss them aside, as if they are just used up wrappers, is sickening.
knightandknaves
BIPproject/undermountain
grognardtavern
I am sure there are more, are all most certainly willing to recieve new posters of pre-3.x
Personally, I also am not pleased by this. Nor am I surprised.
It was great knowing you guys, though.
Technically, people that don't play 4E aren't WotC's customers, so it doesn't make sense for them to do anything for us. That's how capitalism works!
This is the important thing for all the grognards to remember, be ye 1e, 2e, or 3e. If you are not going to play 4e, you are not customers of Wizards of the Coast, and they feel no obligation to give you any special treatment or consideration, because you aren't helping their bottom line, you're only hurting it.
We can expect to be screwed more often, and harder each time, until every last grognard either changes over to 4e, or leaves.
Its good business from their standpoint. We contribute nothing to them, but we consume resources. We are a waste in every way to them. The sooner they can get rid of us, the better in their viewpoint.
"Farewell, reverend Daughter...I need you no longer." -Raistlin
That's what it feels like.
I'll still be playing 3 and 3.5, 'wasting resources' as much as I can. Have fun with your new toys, Wizards...though I doubt anyone else will. Ciao.
Heh...good business from their standpoint to alienate their long-time customers.
They aren't alienating their long-time customers. They're "alienating" TSR's longtime customers. You lot over-estimate yourselves.
They aren't alienating their long-time customers. They're "alienating" TSR's longtime customers. You lot over-estimate yourselves.
If the legacy isn't important, why do they keep naming their new game systems "Dungeons and Dragons X.X"? The only reason they bought the name in the first place was to pimp it to people ("TSR's longtime customers", A.K.A. the ready-made customer base) who loved D&D, and who they are now making every effort to alienate.
Don't get me wrong, it pays the bills for them so I can't say it isn't successful at least in the short term, but there is a limit to how often you can pimp a name (check with Nikon after the E series, e.g.) and eventually they'll have to pay the piper for refusing to support product lines. I'm not sure that time has yet come, but the alleged 4.5 in 2011 will certainly help. Maybe when they call a system D&D 5 in 2015?
Watching the D20 Fantasy fans getting swept under the rug is still hilarious, though.
If the legacy isn't important, why do they keep naming their new game systems "Dungeons and Dragons X.X"?
Obviously you understand branding so I'm not sure why you're surprised. They don't need old customers to survive, they need new customers to prosper. Worrying only about the built-in fanbase is exactly why comics books are selling so poorly. Marvel and DC are more concerned with keeping the fanboys happy than they are about bringing in new customers and it's dragging the industry down financially and creatively.
Eventually, the 1st/2nd/and now 3rd edition fans are all going to die-off (so to speak.)
Who will be left to play the game after that if no new material is created?
The game can't survive on Grognards and Ebay alone.
Obviously you understand branding so I'm not sure why you're surprised. They don't need old customers to survive, they need new customers to prosper. Worrying only about the built-in fanbase is exactly why comics books are selling so poorly. Marvel and DC are more concerned with keeping the fanboys happy than they are about bringing in new customers and it's dragging the industry down financially and creatively.
Eventually, the 1st/2nd/and now 3rd edition fans are all going to die-off (so to speak.)
Who will be left to play the game after that if no new material is created?
The game can't survive on Grognards and Ebay alone.
Actually thats not quite correct. Any business course will teach one that it is much cheaper (thus more profitable) to keep an existing customer base then to create a new one.
Actually thats not quite correct. Any business course will teach one that it is much cheaper (thus more profitable) to keep an existing customer base then to create a new one.
Yes, but not at the expense of possible new customers. Entrenched 1st/2nd edition players are not an installed user base of WotC products.
Yes, but not at the expense of possible new customers. Entrenched 1st/2nd edition players are not an installed user base of WotC products.
What about us 3rd editioners?
Yes, but not at the expense of possible new customers. Entrenched 1st/2nd edition players are not an installed user base of WotC products.
It depends on how many new customers can be realistically gained. In a niche market such a role playing games, an industry leader such as Dungeons and Dragons is assumed to already hold the lion share of the market. It is unrealistic to expect to draw in enough new customers to counterbalance the entirety of their existing customer base. Their hope is that enough of the existing customer base will remain that any new customers drawn from other markets (such as the video game industry) will counterbalance the customers they are sure to lose. If they do, then it is a success. But to say they do not care for any of the existing market would be like saying Coke did not care if any of it's market stuck around for New Coke.
In order to keep the majority of the market share they must keep the majority of their existing base.
What about us 3rd editioners?
We (3rd editioners) would be the installed user base.
It depends on how many new customers can be realistically gained. In a niche market such a role playing games, an industry leader such as Dungeons and Dragons is assumed to already hold the lion share of the market. It is unrealistic to expect to draw in enough new customers to counterbalance the entirety of their existing customer base. Their hope is that enough of the existing customer base will remain that any new customers drawn from other markets (such as the video game industry) will counterbalance the customers they are sure to lose. If they do, then it is a success. But to say they do not care for any of the existing market would be like saying Coke did not care if any of it's market stuck around for New Coke.
In order to keep the majority of the market share they must keep the majority of their existing base.
I'm not saying that they don't or shouldn't care about previous customers. But customers of TSR and not WotC should not expect special treatment just because of commercial branding.
It depends on how many new customers can be realistically gained. In a niche market such a role playing games, an industry leader such as Dungeons and Dragons is assumed to already hold the lion share of the market. It is unrealistic to expect to draw in enough new customers to counterbalance the entirety of their existing customer base. Their hope is that enough of the existing customer base will remain that any new customers drawn from other markets (such as the video game industry) will counterbalance the customers they are sure to lose. If they do, then it is a success. But to say they do not care for any of the existing market would be like saying Coke did not care if any of it's market stuck around for New Coke.
In order to keep the majority of the market share they must keep the majority of their existing base.
It seems that they will succeed, though. Quite a few people seemed interested in converting.
Even in the very unlikely event that 4.0 does bomb, won't Magic balance things out for WotC?
I'm not saying that they don't or shouldn't care about previous customers. But customers of TSR and not WotC should not expect special treatment just because of commercial branding.
Well, the point of this thread seems to be that they went back and their word and lied.
We (3rd editioners) would be the installed user base.
I'm not saying that they don't or shouldn't care about previous customers. But customers of TSR and not WotC should not expect special treatment just because of commercial branding.
1st and 2nd ed. players constitue a signifigant segment of the roleplaying game market, hence the move to 4th Edition brought with it constant references about how they were bringing the game back to it's roots. They are in essence attempting to entice the older edition players to this new edition by playing up it's similarities with 1st and 2nd edition. So in one definition, they are already giving special attention to the older TSR player base, but that attention is intended to grow 4th edition's player base. They are a shrewd business, they understand that if they ignore the remnants of TSR's player base, their competition will be eager to woo that share of the market.
Obviously you understand branding so I'm not sure why you're surprised.
Who's surprised? I'm simply pointing out that they base their marketing strategy for their games on customer recognition...and then throw away the customers who built that recognition. It's profitable in the short run, and eventually they'll pay for it, but I don't think they've reached that point yet.
They don't need old customers to survive, they need new customers to prosper.
My initial reaction comes across as more unfriendly than it should. In any event, you're dead wrong. They need more customers regardless of where they came from, so that brings us back to pointing out what's wrong with deliberately alienate some. If you know of ANY business that does better by alienating proven customers, I'd love to hear about it?
Worrying only about the built-in fanbase is exactly why comics books are selling so poorly. Marvel and DC are more concerned with keeping the fanboys happy than they are about bringing in new customers and it's dragging the industry down financially and creatively.
And if Marvel is stupid for ignoring one demographic entirely, what does that make Wizbro for doing the exact same thing?
Eventually, the 1st/2nd/and now 3rd edition fans are all going to die-off (so to speak.)
Who will be left to play the game after that if no new material is created?
The game can't survive on Grognards and Ebay alone.
Something I always find amusing when people want to apologize for Wizbro's track record is the "It's a business, why shouldn't they try to make money?" defense. I've never had a problem with that part. The weird thing is that these same people simply don't understand my "I'm a consumer, why shouldn't I try to buy the best product?" criticism. How can somebody simply fail to grasp half of the free market equation?
And have I mentioned what a bad idea it is for Wizbro to mix people who think TETSNBN was a good idea with people who prefer D&D?
I would still like to know if it really matters. Won't Magic balance out any loss from D&D, and then some?
Well, the point of this thread seems to be that they went back and their word and lied.
Can't say. I never saw them make any such claim personally.
1st and 2nd ed. players constitue a signifigant segment of the roleplaying game market, hence the move to 4th Edition brought with it constant references about how they were bringing the game back to it's roots. They are in essence attempting to entice the older edition players to this new edition by playing up it's similarities with 1st and 2nd edition. So in one definition, they are already giving special attention to the older TSR player base, but that attention is intended to grow 4th edition's player base. They are a shrewd business, they understand that if they ignore the remnants of TSR's player base, their competition will be eager to woo that share of the market.
Again, I've not personally seen them making those claims. Either way, how many 1st/2nd Edders are on this board screaming about how they never played 3rd and will never play 4th without knowing a damned thing about either game? What business would ever take those people seriously?
Who's surprised? I'm simply pointing out that they base their marketing strategy for their games on customer recognition...and then throw away the customers who built that recognition. It's profitable in the short run, and eventually they'll pay for it, but I don't think they've reached that point yet.
You don't know that they'll ever reach that point. Hasbro is hardly hurting for money and D&D is hardly the backbone of their financial stability. It's probably not even a rib.
My initial reaction comes across as more unfriendly than it should. In any event, you're dead wrong. They need more customers regardless of where they came from, so that brings us back to pointing out what's wrong with deliberately alienate some. If you know of ANY business that does better by alienating proven customers, I'd love to hear about it?
They do need more customers. But as a business, would you focus on the loudmouthed 'netters who are screaming about how they've never bought a WotC product and never will or would you focus on possible new, open-minded customers along with the people who are willing to actually wait for the game to come out before making a choice?
And if Marvel is stupid for ignoring one demographic entirely, what does that make Wizbro for doing the exact same thing?
They aren't. All they've done is not segment a free message board. Y'know, the original topic at hand? People want specific sections of a free board dedicated to a product that brings absolutely no money to WotC. The "1st/2nd ed. Only" crowd aren't customers. They're freeloaders.
Something I always find amusing when people want to apologize for Wizbro's track record is the "It's a business, why shouldn't they try to make money?" defense. I've never had a problem with that part. The weird thing is that these same people simply don't understand my "I'm a consumer, why shouldn't I try to buy the best product?" criticism. How can somebody simply fail to grasp half of the free market equation?
If you're not a consumer of their products, what right do you have to demand anything from the company? Because you bought a product with the same trademarked name from another company 20 years ago? Hah. No.
Again, I've not personally seen them making those claims. Either way, how many 1st/2nd Edders are on this board screaming about how they never played 3rd and will never play 4th without knowing a damned thing about either game? What business would ever take those people seriously?
I think we both know the majority of 1st/2nd edition fans also play to some extent with 3rd edition and will likely remain a big presence among those who buy 4th edition supplies. I may not play it often, but I have a decent sized library of 3.5. WotC is attempting to bring those who primarily play 1st/2nd edition back into the fold. Why else would they be making such a point about how 4th edition is reminiscent of old school D&D? Thus for folk like myself who do buy the newer products even if I primarily play the older TSR products, yes, alienating such players is probably not very smart. Time will tell.
I would still like to know if it really matters. Won't Magic balance out any loss from D&D, and then some?
Well if we are talking about just WotC and not Hasbro as a whole the answer is and Then Some. My instinct says WotC's most profitable business line is M:tG, followed by Books, then DDM, then Pokemon, then Maybe DnD. I know when Hasbro bought out WotC it talked first about M:tG and getting a 'foothold' in the Fantasy book market. then as a kind of an aside Dungeons and Dragons.
Talking about Hasbro they go 'WotC huh?'. Read their (very nicely setup) prospectus online, WotC products are mentioned in passing, but their high sellers are never from WotC or AH (going back to the buyout). Part of their recent quarter slowdown is attributed to the cost of setting up DDI (and less profit per object of their toy division due to increased shipping costs. A total for these at 1.2 Million I couldn't ever find where shipping costs were listed to do a diesel price mile of a typical semi truck/trailer, but I personally think that its more of the money than DDI. In fact, comparison on just Diseal rates show: 21.38% increase in its cost. I would imagine across the board outside of employee costs, transportation is the second largest expense experienced by Hasbro.
well concidering I own 3 and 3.5 and planned on purchasing 4e, well until now it seems, pretty much makes your post worthless, in an attempt to point how I am not a custumer now doesn't it.
Why does your purchase of 4E hinge on whether there are two separate message boards for previous editions of D&D or only one? Why not go all out and demand five while we're at it: one for Basic D&D, one for 1E, one for 2E, one for 3.0, and one for 3.5?
In 7 days I'll be a gronard...my account isn't even a year old...
Technically, you don't become a grognard until your edition no longer has support. Given that Paizo is still publishing adventures for 3.5, and is planning a (modified) hardcover version of the rules in the SRD for release in August 2009, you can relax. Just because WotC is putting out 4E products, doesn't mean there won't be published products for the 3.X players and DMs. I think that's part of the reason the 1E/2E grognards are demanding their own forum: they just want some love.
And Eldritich Wizardry. It should have its own forum.
Ooh, and Blackmoor, should probably get a forum. Would it be too much to pre-emptively ask for a Pathfinder forum while we're at it?
I actually am not a grognard, I fully plan to play 4E. I just feel it is important to respect those that came before. I don't understand why forum traffic should demand the OOP forum be destroyed. There was plenty of traffic, and it created a home for people to come to who may not be playing the current edition. At the same time it brings those people to wizards.com and they may look at the new product. Maybe even purchase or look at it in the store. Without the OOP forum you wouldn't have this. And... again I reiterate the respect that the editions before built up. The house that 0D&D built as it were.
I agree, the staff here state the OOP threads were not very well visited yet the Quiz thread was just one example of how that is not true. In any event, it was just a bit more code, it did not actually make any real overhead difference. Poster's like Prof. Pacali exagerate what the old schoolers want by making absurd statements like us wanting board areas for obscure topics when in reality we were both happy and civil in our own little corner simply dedicated to 1st and 2nd edition (one board by the way). But hey, it's theirs to do with as they want and websites like Dragonsfoot have never had so much free publicity. Maybe our little corner of the world was starting to get too much traffic...
I agree, the staff here state the OOP threads were not very well visited yet the Quiz thread was just one example of how that is not true. In any event, it was just a bit more code, it did not actually make any real overhead difference. Poster's like Prof. Pacali exagerate what the old schoolers want by making absurd statements like us wanting threads for obscure topics when in reality we were both happy and civil in our own little corner simply dedicated to 1st and 2nd edition (one board by the way). But hey, it's theirs to do with as they want and websites like Dragonsfoot have never had so much free publicity. Maybe our little corner of the world was starting to get too much traffic...
GamerZero stated that during the transition period any forum with very limited posting was liable to be merged with other forums. He also said that this decision could be reversed if there was sufficient posts related to that topic. The solution isn't to complain on the Comunity Business forum, but to start posting (legitimate) threads about 1E or 2E subjects. If there are enough posts on those subjects (and I mean real posts, not spam) the Powers That Be may create a new sub-forum to direct the traffic there.
If all the 1E and 2E fans decamp to Dragonsfoot and other sites, obviously there will not be a 1E/2E specific forum in the near future. While that might be what some of the Grognards want, wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to expose 3.X players to the rich history of D&D? Also wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to encounter the players who loved 3.X enough that they either will not convert to 4E, or they want to play both? Might the players of 1E/2E be enlighted by conversing civilly with the 3.X fans? Why do the fans of non-supported editions need to be in separate ghettos? Admittedly there are Grognards who can't stand 3.X to the point where they would probably be better served with a separate forum, but unless they can produce enough traffic in the next few weeks to show they deserve one, they are out of luck.
......but the alleged 4.5 in 2011 .....
Can you please provide a source for this?! Was this said my WotC themselves?
Can you please provide a source for this?! Was this said my WotC themselves?
Just an assumption based on Wizbro's track record.
GamerZero stated that during the transition period any forum with very limited posting was liable to be merged with other forums. He also said that this decision could be reversed if there was sufficient posts related to that topic. The solution isn't to complain on the Comunity Business forum, but to start posting (legitimate) threads about 1E or 2E subjects. If there are enough posts on those subjects (and I mean real posts, not spam) the Powers That Be may create a new sub-forum to direct the traffic there.
If all the 1E and 2E fans decamp to Dragonsfoot and other sites, obviously there will not be a 1E/2E specific forum in the near future. While that might be what some of the Grognards want, wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to expose 3.X players to the rich history of D&D? Also wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to encounter the players who loved 3.X enough that they either will not convert to 4E, or they want to play both? Might the players of 1E/2E be enlighted by conversing civilly with the 3.X fans? Why do the fans of non-supported editions need to be in separate ghettos? Admittedly there are Grognards who can't stand 3.X to the point where they would probably be better served with a separate forum, but unless they can produce enough traffic in the next few weeks to show they deserve one, they are out of luck.
Well, this thread was originally placed in the OOP D&D General forum.
Just an assumption based on Wizbro's track record.
Oh, OK. Thanks.
It seemed like something WotC would do, though.
Well if we are talking about just WotC and not Hasbro as a whole the answer is and Then Some. My instinct says WotC's most profitable business line is M:tG, followed by Books, then DDM, then Pokemon, then Maybe DnD. I know when Hasbro bought out WotC it talked first about M:tG and getting a 'foothold' in the Fantasy book market. then as a kind of an aside Dungeons and Dragons.
Talking about Hasbro they go 'WotC huh?'. Read their (very nicely setup) prospectus online, WotC products are mentioned in passing, but their high sellers are never from WotC or AH (going back to the buyout). Part of their recent quarter slowdown is attributed to the cost of setting up DDI (and less profit per object of their toy division due to increased shipping costs. A total for these at 1.2 Million I couldn't ever find where shipping costs were listed to do a diesel price mile of a typical semi truck/trailer, but I personally think that its more of the money than DDI. In fact, comparison on just Diseal rates show: 21.38% increase in its cost. I would imagine across the board outside of employee costs, transportation is the second largest expense experienced by Hasbro.
Thanks for the information. I guess it really makes no difference either way. It could bomb beyond compare, but neither Hasbro nor WotC will feel it at all.
Can you please provide a source for this?! Was this said my WotC themselves?
No. It wasn't. It is a throw away insult to Wotc. TPTB have stated many times that there will not be a 4.5, and based upon the anger at 3.5 I fully believe this. They will update the game with new material in the form of PHB2, 3, 4, etc, and DMG2, 3, 4, etc. All of which are not necessary to play the game, just additions if you want them. They are going away from the idea of splatbooks, as in more crap, and going with the balance approach that anything produced from here on in is going to be balanced against everything before. So there shouldn't be a power creep.
Also, if DDI is successful then they will have an appropriate cash cow so that they do not need to justify to Hasbro why their books aren't selling as well, and thus need to change things.
If all goes according to plan I do not see another edition change for upwards of 15 years. If it doesn't, we will see 5E in 8. But there will most likely never be a 4.5.
This information can be found in developer's blogs, talks on Enworld, talks on this forum, and etc. My speculation at the end is my speculation, so take it for what its worth.
Why does your purchase of 4E hinge on whether there are two separate message boards for previous editions of D&D or only one? Why not go all out and demand five while we're at it: one for Basic D&D, one for 1E, one for 2E, one for 3.0, and one for 3.5?
To state the obvious: Because the prior WoTC editions were all relatively the same and quite compatible with one another. Mixing those with the 3.x ers is a disaster. Most of the time, its just going to be a confusing mess for those trying to keep the AD&D community alive.
I mean seriously, how much effort does it take to keep one board open for this crowd? Its just organizational formality. Going back on thier word and flushing us all together in one forum is a pro-active move on their part to disassimilate the 'older editions' crowd, but doing it in a way that is not as blatant as comming out and saying "We just don't give a rats behind about you anymore. See the door, use it." Because a statement like that would have a very negative impact on their company image. So doing this allows them to slowly accomplish the same thing but fly under the bad PR radar.
I agree, the staff here state the OOP threads were not very well visited yet the Quiz thread was just one example of how that is not true. In any event, it was just a bit more code, it did not actually make any real overhead difference. Poster's like Prof. Pacali exagerate what the old schoolers want by making absurd statements like us wanting board areas for obscure topics when in reality we were both happy and civil in our own little corner simply dedicated to 1st and 2nd edition (one board by the way). But hey, it's theirs to do with as they want and websites like Dragonsfoot have never had so much free publicity. Maybe our little corner of the world was starting to get too much traffic...
You got a point. I had noticed quite a bit more traffic in the past couple months. There were a number of posts from people saying that with 4th comming out, they wanted to go back to 1st or 2nd edition. Back to the golden age.
They do need more customers. But as a business, would you focus on the loudmouthed 'netters who are screaming about how they've never bought a WotC product and never will or would you focus on possible new, open-minded customers along with the people who are willing to actually wait for the game to come out before making a choice?
So your apology boils down to the belief that their poor behavior is justified because of our negative response to their poor behavior. Slight problem with cause and effect there, but whatever works for you. I'm not actually arguing with you so much as correcting you, so there's no point in dragging this out too much if you're not paying attention.
And I think this is where I bid farewell. These boards are painfully slow, the D&D is getting buried amid all sorts of Wizbro garbage, and there are those who just have to jump in and tell us all that the emperor is well dressed.
If all the 1E and 2E fans decamp to Dragonsfoot and other sites, obviously there will not be a 1E/2E specific forum in the near future. While that might be what some of the Grognards want, wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to expose 3.X players to the rich history of D&D?
LOL, your kidding right? This said almost directly after your quote:
Ooh, and Blackmoor, should probably get a forum. Would it be too much to pre-emptively ask for a Pathfinder forum while we're at it?
Yes, I can see how much you wish to sit at the feet of 1st/2nd edition gamers. Sorry, your point is made much better if you had not just made fun of the 1st/2nd edition gamer concerns.:rolleye2:
GamerZero stated that during the transition period any forum with very limited posting was liable to be merged with other forums. He also said that this decision could be reversed if there was sufficient posts related to that topic. The solution isn't to complain on the Comunity Business forum, but to start posting (legitimate) threads about 1E or 2E subjects. If there are enough posts on those subjects (and I mean real posts, not spam) the Powers That Be may create a new sub-forum to direct the traffic there.
If all the 1E and 2E fans decamp to Dragonsfoot and other sites, obviously there will not be a 1E/2E specific forum in the near future. While that might be what some of the Grognards want, wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to expose 3.X players to the rich history of D&D? Also wouldn't it be better for the 1E/2E players to encounter the players who loved 3.X enough that they either will not convert to 4E, or they want to play both? Might the players of 1E/2E be enlighted by conversing civilly with the 3.X fans? Why do the fans of non-supported editions need to be in separate ghettos? Admittedly there are Grognards who can't stand 3.X to the point where they would probably be better served with a separate forum, but unless they can produce enough traffic in the next few weeks to show they deserve one, they are out of luck.
Are you kidding me? Thats like putting fire and gas in a oxygen rich room and expecting them to all co-exist and become best buddies. Your NUTZ!
We had a nice home where flaming was at an incredible minimum. It was actually the most civil board on the entire forum. The only time it happened is when 3rd or 4thers would come there and try to tell us why we should switch.
No. It wasn't. It is a throw away insult to Wotc. TPTB have stated many times that there will not be a 4.5, and based upon the anger at 3.5 I fully believe this. They will update the game with new material in the form of PHB2, 3, 4, etc, and DMG2, 3, 4, etc. All of which are not necessary to play the game, just additions if you want them. They are going away from the idea of splatbooks, as in more crap, and going with the balance approach that anything produced from here on in is going to be balanced against everything before. So there shouldn't be a power creep.
Also, if DDI is successful then they will have an appropriate cash cow so that they do not need to justify to Hasbro why their books aren't selling as well, and thus need to change things.
If all goes according to plan I do not see another edition change for upwards of 15 years. If it doesn't, we will see 5E in 8. But there will most likely never be a 4.5.
This information can be found in developer's blogs, talks on Enworld, talks on this forum, and etc. My speculation at the end is my speculation, so take it for what its worth.
Amazingly I would rather have a 4.5 than need to buy the core set again every year. And who are we kidding, they will make it so you have to buy it. And even if they don't, imagine the confusion if the whole group isn't on the same book.
Amazingly I would rather have a 4.5 than need to buy the core set again every year. And who are we kidding, they will make it so you have to buy it. And even if they don't, imagine the confusion if the whole group isn't on the same book.
um.. no. The DM controls what is in his or her game. Not the availability of books. If I, the DM, only wanted to purchase the initial 3, and stated clearly that we were using only the initial 3 unless I approve of something else, then thats what I do. The problem we had in previous editions evidentally is the wussification of the DM. He or She has the ultimate say on what can or cannot be used in their setting.
No one will be at your house next year with a gun saying buy PHB2. You are not forced to buy this as I stated earlier. And I will cut people off at the pass of snarkyness and state "let's assume (whether you are or aren't) are going to buy the initial 3."
I am amazed that the reluctance to purchase a new PHB or DMG, when realistically you only buy what interests you. Just like in previous editions. I never bought the complete arcane as I had no desire to play a wizard, but I bought the complete fighter because I liked archers. I had Sword and Fist but not the bard one. Other people bought everything. You don't need to do this, and the biggest difference between previous editions and this one is the desire by the designers to create new content with balance in mind both for the initial classes and abilities, and future classes and abilities. This was not done in previous editions and we saw a power creep, in 3.x it was towards clerics, druids, and wizards. I assume in previous editions it was to other ideas. Needless to say balance is what I look forward to the most in 4E.
Also, are you calling me a liar? For what? I simply stated what the designers and Wotc officials have stated. Where do you get that I lied from? That is a serious insult in my opinion. I have not disparaged you at all.
You got a point. I had noticed quite a bit more traffic in the past couple months. There were a number of posts from people saying that with 4th comming out, they wanted to go back to 1st or 2nd edition. Back to the golden age.
And that's exactly why they had to bury the 1/2E posts among the 3e ones... to make it harder for anyone who wants to read them to find them, to discourage anyone from "regressing" back to TSR's game.
No one will be at your house next year with a gun saying buy PHB2. You are not forced to buy this as I stated earlier. And I will cut people off at the pass of snarkyness and state "let's assume (whether you are or aren't) are going to buy the initial 3."
I am amazed that the reluctance to purchase a new PHB or DMG, when realistically you only buy what interests you. Just like in previous editions. I never bought the complete arcane as I had no desire to play a wizard, but I bought the complete fighter because I liked archers. I had Sword and Fist but not the bard one. Other people bought everything. You don't need to do this, and the biggest difference between previous editions and this one is the desire by the designers to create new content with balance in mind both for the initial classes and abilities, and future classes and abilities. This was not done in previous editions and we saw a power creep, in 3.x it was towards clerics, druids, and wizards. I assume in previous editions it was to other ideas. Needless to say balance is what I look forward to the most in 4E.
OK, first of all your post was hard to follow. But from what I could follow, your saying that unlike 3rd edition, the company wont force you to buy additional books for 4.5. Huh?
Your basing this on what, the fact that 3.5 did require all new books from 3.0? I guess I'm confused. Please elaborate.
You got a point. I had noticed quite a bit more traffic in the past couple months. There were a number of posts from people saying that with 4th comming out, they wanted to go back to 1st or 2nd edition. Back to the golden age.
We all noticed it. Makes you wonder...
OK, first of all your post was hard to follow. But from what I could follow, your saying that unlike 3rd edition, the company wont force you to buy additional books for 4.5. Huh?
Your basing this on what, the fact that 3.5 did require all new books from 3.0? I guess I'm confused. Please elaborate.
Wotc didn't force anyone to buy 3.5. No one came to my FLGS and told us to buy it or they would kill this sack of puppies. I bought 3.5 because it fixed the ranger and some of the spells that I thought were already broken.
What I am saying is that the design of 4E is about balance. It is about balance in abilities from class to class, from power source to power source. With this balance in mind, the books that are coming out are not power progression as they were in the past, but additional content that you can take or leave at your pleasure. As I stated earlier, as a player I will more than likely buy fighter books and books that have fighter things in them. I probably will not buy books that have wizard stuff in it.
My buying habits will not change for 4E. However based on the balance design, I should be able to incorporate the new material into my fighter without making him overpowered. This adherance to balance will enable the designers to not have to nerf anyone, or boost anyone. There will not have to be a ranger boost to make the class what it was supposed to be, as the class should be, by the idea of balance, solid right now.
So... that is the first reason why there won't be a 4.5, inherent lack of flaws in the balance of the game between classes.
Second reason comes upon the success or failure of DDI. If DDI is successful and draws in lots of subscriptions then this is the cash cow that Wotc can point at Hasbro to keep the corporate shills at bay. This allows the balance design to continue, the campaign settings to be released, a new one each year, and the books to continue to be of good quality (at least the theory goes). So if it is successful they don't need to come out with a 4.5 as there should be no need to imbalance the game to sell books like they did in 3.x.
Third reason, there was a general uproar and then quiet acceptance of 3.5 for those of us who played 3.0. Most weren't happy, but most bought the books. This level of unhappiness however has reared its ugly head very early at the shear mention of 4th edition. I do not think Wotc would make the same mistake twice, thus the idea of designing 4E around balance.
Of course again, this comes from reading the blogs and the forums. Like I said before I don't believe that they will ever come out with a 4.5, if they had to scrap things they will come out with a 5E. If 4E is not as successful as anticipated then I would say 5E would come out in 2016. 8 years, just like the life of 3.x. They have enough campaign material to put out for 4E, FR, Eberron, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, Planescape, Mystara (sp?) that their stated goals of releasing one each year gives at least 8 years of time before the next edition.
If 4E is as successful as Wotc anticipates I could see this edition giving 2E a run for its money on length of time as a single edition.
I hope that was clearer, but I think I just rambled on more. Sorry I am a bit tired.
Back to someone else's point. I do think for those of you still playing and enjoying discussion on 1E and 2E you should post more about your subjects. This will show TPTB that the OOP forum is needed. I felt it was needed and I enjoyed reading about older editions (just because I like and will play 4E doesn't mean I don't want to take ideas from the OOP board, you guys play with real imagination).
Anyway, I urge you to post about the older editions, post a lot, post often, argue about your edition with each other. This will show that your forum is viable and a vital part.
Plus, what is D&D without the grognards? It just wouldn't be the same.
Btw... I see we have digressed into an edition war of sorts (I personally don't care what you play, just as long as you respect my decision to play what I want to play, and I will respect your decision to play what you want to play without insults).
Back to someone else's point. I do think for those of you still playing and enjoying discussion on 1E and 2E you should post more about your subjects. This will show TPTB that the OOP forum is needed. I felt it was needed and I enjoyed reading about older editions (just because I like and will play 4E doesn't mean I don't want to take ideas from the OOP board, you guys play with real imagination).
Anyway, I urge you to post about the older editions, post a lot, post often, argue about your edition with each other. This will show that your forum is viable and a vital part.
Plus, what is D&D without the grognards? It just wouldn't be the same.
Feel free to drop by Dragonsfoot, we are definately posting;)
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/index.php
angel
So your apology boils down to the belief that their poor behavior is justified because of our negative response to their poor behavior. Slight problem with cause and effect there, but whatever works for you. I'm not actually arguing with you so much as correcting you, so there's no point in dragging this out too much if you're not paying attention.
And I think this is where I bid farewell. These boards are painfully slow, the D&D is getting buried amid all sorts of Wizbro garbage, and there are those who just have to jump in and tell us all that the emperor is well dressed.
Your first mistake was to assume I was apologizing. Your second was to believe your poor behavior is justified by someone else's supposed poor behavior. Poor form is poor form. WotC is required to give you nothing beyond the books you buy. The material on the website, including the message board, is a free-be. You should appreciate getting anything extra at all which, of course, you don't.
The world doesn't owe you a living, son. Get over yourselves.
What if the DM wants to incorporate most/everything from the PHB 4 and DMG 4, yet some of the players only have the original set, and might not want to rebuy them all?
Also, in the end is there really a mechanical difference between a X.5 release, and the changes to the game which will be made by the PHB 3/4, DMG 3/4, and MM 3/4?
And won't new books use the mechanical updated rules in the new core books, hence we will have the 3.0/3.5 compatibility issue every year with the core set?
I agree with you. We have certain levels of activity that we need to aim for in each of our forums so they do not appear to be unused. I'm on board with making a forum for any topic as long as it will generate enough discussion.
The trouble is that forums with only a few active threads per week tend to end up losing critical mass, as many people will stop visiting them. On the other hand, I understand that no one wants to wade through a bunch of stuff they don't like to get to the content they DO like. So it's a tough situation where we can't have it both ways.
But if there is enough traffic, we'll make more forums.
It's all well and good to say so, but the problem is that WotC's credibility has taken quite a hit lately. From untrue denials of the existence of 4e, to claims of ending magical item dependency (then creating a table to show dms exactly how many magic items they're supposed to give out per level, which is more than 90% of my characters have ever had), to the merging of all previous editions (after explicitly stating you wouldn't), to a dozen more examples I don't feel like listing, we've gotten more lies and half-truths out of you guys than truths.
It's all well and good to say so, but the problem is that WotC's credibility has taken quite a hit lately. From untrue denials of the existence of 4e, to claims of ending magical item dependency (then creating a table to show dms exactly how many magic items they're supposed to give out per level, which is more than 90% of my characters have ever had), to the merging of all previous editions (after explicitly stating you wouldn't), to a dozen more examples I don't feel like listing, we've gotten more lies and half-truths out of you guys than truths.
I don't want to derail this thread, but I don't believe any of those things you listed are true. I know that there were lots of rumors about things like WotC lying about 4E, which later turned out to be misquotes, and I suspect the same may be true with your other examples. I can't know for sure unless you can cite a webpage or forum post where something was said that turned out to be untrue.
In any case where that may have happened, I can look into it and try and explain why it happened, but I can pretty much guarentee it wasn't because anyone at WotC was trying to intentionally lie or tell half-truths.
I agree with you. We have certain levels of activity that we need to aim for in each of our forums so they do not appear to be unused. I'm on board with making a forum for any topic as long as it will generate enough discussion.
The trouble is that forums with only a few active threads per week tend to end up losing critical mass, as many people will stop visiting them. On the other hand, I understand that no one wants to wade through a bunch of stuff they don't like to get to the content they DO like. So it's a tough situation where we can't have it both ways.
But if there is enough traffic, we'll make more forums.
Now let me see if I get this right. WotC thinks that having a highly traffic forum is bad because it woudl cause confusion so some forum should be split which amy cause lower traffic in these new area. But at the same time traffic much meet some # requirement in order to have a forum for a topic to exist?
So it is the numbers rather than the interest in discussing a topic that matters?
WHAT?!
If only a few people want to continue discussing a topic in a thread do you close the thread because only 2 or 3 people are posting in it? I would hope not. Nor should you say the same for a forum. A forum without much activity could just be that people don't know where it is, don't know what to add, lurk, etc.
I have seen on many forums people that lurk for years until one topic come up that they really want to say something about and then do so.
Maybe stop counting "traffic" to an area, and just count site traffic to know what is needed for forums. you cannot run forums like a business. When you do, your forums become your customer service, and ANY other avenues of customer service will be ignore by the users of the forums. But I think that should be pretty clear to WotC now. You must run forums like its own entity. Not that a forum needs to be created for just a few people to post, but don't kill a forum jsut because only a few people are currently posting.
Again with all the changes around here with the game of D&D, it was a dreadfully poor decision to change anything until after the new release so you could get an idea on what exactly these "traffic counts" will be.
It isn't like you need extra FVCLS or whatver for a forum with just a few people posting or a few active fast/slow threads. And CM/CS won't have that much time to deal with anything as those causing problems will likely be reported anyway by other FVLCS that come across them and bring them to CM.CS attention.
WotC does not need to aim for anything in regards to a specific forum. Maybe for D&D itself to have forums to require part of its budget to be used for them, but WotC has no say in what the forum needs as far as when it concerns what the users wish to discuss. WotC should AIM for a higher level of user satisfaction. Mike, whoever put this idea of levels of activity aims forth, you should go to and tell them to learn something about forums. I know you take the orders handed down, but you can tell Randy or whomever it is listed in all those signatures, that forums don't work they way they are trying to make them work.
Yes, I can see how much you wish to sit at the feet of 1st/2nd edition gamers. Sorry, your point is made much better if you had not just made fun of the 1st/2nd edition gamer concerns.:rolleye2:
Actually Eldritich Wizardy and Blackmoor deserve as much attention as '1st' edition, both were instrumental in laying the ground work for 'classic' DnD. If people want 1st edition/2nd edition ADnD forums, why not forums for true classic DnD like Dungeons and Dragons before it needed another title. Or Chainmail, or Red/Blue books et cetra. To believe that one set of fans deserve their own forums and a not another one that plays a drastically diffrent game is preposterous, if OP is all grouped together fine, to say ADND era is somehow More deserving of reserved space than ODnD and the basic dungeons and dragons is elitism of the strongest kind.
I don't want to derail this thread, but I don't believe any of those things you listed are true. I know that there were lots of rumors about things like WotC lying about 4E, which later turned out to be misquotes, and I suspect the same may be true with your other examples. I can't know for sure unless you can cite a webpage or forum post where something was said that turned out to be untrue.
In any case where that may have happened, I can look into it and try and explain why it happened, but I can pretty much guarentee it wasn't because anyone at WotC was trying to intentionally lie or tell half-truths.
The point about whether or not they denied 4e is moot. It is Felt they denied 4e, and rumors (like the recent Hansen's disease scare in Arkansas) is more potent then the truth.
I don't think they purposefully mislead anyone, and anyone with a desire/will could contact officials at the trademark and patent offices and find out that through (I think) 8th edition has already been reserved. After all, Microsoft starts working on the next version of Windows just as soon as the current one hits the shelves, and their customer base is a lot less persnickety then Wizards is.
After all, Microsoft starts working on the next version of Windows just as soon as the current one hits the shelves, and their customer base is a lot less persnickety then Wizards is.
Really? Those Mac commercials aren't totally lying about people downgrading. I myself recently turned to a Mac due to the issues with Vista.
Still, it seems like there will be serious issues and confusion if not all the players and DM(s) have the same books.
What if the DM wants to incorporate most/everything from the PHB 4 and DMG 4, yet some of the players only have the original set, and might not want to rebuy them all?
Also, in the end is there really a mechanical difference between a X.5 release, and the changes to the game which will be made by the PHB 3/4, DMG 3/4, and MM 3/4?
And won't new books use the mechanical updated rules in the new core books, hence we will have the 3.0/3.5 compatibility issue every year with the core set?
You obviously ignored what I typed. If the DM allows a book, then its allowed. If player Y says he or she doesn't want to buy the book, the DM should then share his or her copy. Again nowhere does it say you have to buy the book.
They have stated there will not be mechanical differences in the PHB's just new classes, new power sources, and new ways to do stuff with the existing abilities. No new rules, no boosting of classes, etc.
GamerZero, there was the perception that 4E was coming out shortly after 3.5, but then Wotc denied they were working on this, or at least kept mum about it, which to some people is a denial.
Traffic shouldn't be the reason a board is deleted. People still post there and perhaps your standards of posting should be lowered as hellmute said from posts per day to site traffic.
Btw... I see we have digressed into an edition war of sorts (I personally don't care what you play, just as long as you respect my decision to play what I want to play, and I will respect your decision to play what you want to play without insults).
Back to someone else's point. I do think for those of you still playing and enjoying discussion on 1E and 2E you should post more about your subjects. This will show TPTB that the OOP forum is needed. I felt it was needed and I enjoyed reading about older editions (just because I like and will play 4E doesn't mean I don't want to take ideas from the OOP board, you guys play with real imagination).
Anyway, I urge you to post about the older editions, post a lot, post often, argue about your edition with each other. This will show that your forum is viable and a vital part.
Plus, what is D&D without the grognards? It just wouldn't be the same.
I think its too late. I've already seen a handful of people leave these boards and move thier discussions to another website.
I think its too late. I've already seen a handful of people leave these boards and move thier discussions to another website.
Which site(s)?
I had a laptop, whose model discontinued, and even tho it still worked, they stopped making batteries for it. That was that. It sucked. I was forced to upgrade, and my new laptop is more powerful (albeit it does have issues).
That said, playing previous editions doesnt generate income for WotC directly, but WotC does have a business interest to promote a wider RPG culture, generally. To that extend, this website already supports nonprofitable games, like previous editions and obscure d20 products. Gleemax even supports RPGs from other corporations, like using Play-by-Post to play GURPS.
If grognards want to maintain a vibrant presence at the Gleemax website. Grognards themselves must take 100% responsibility to encourage grognards at other vintage D&D websites to relocate to the Gleemax website.
Even if grognards just guarantee 17 renewed threads per day, it would be enough to sustain a dedicated thread. The CM is very willing to provide the service - so long as it gets reasonable use. Its not much to ask for.
Which site(s)?
See my sig. The Mystara community has pretty much moved there entirely. We basically maintain just enough presence here to let people know where to go for Mystara stuff.
Really? Those Mac commercials aren't totally lying about people downgrading. I myself recently turned to a Mac due to the issues with Vista.
No they aren't totally lying, but if you think that the average PC user is Microsoft's customer base, you are deluding yourself. Micorsoft's OS's customer base is the Mass Produced PC Companies (Compaq/Dale)
MPC don't care about the issues with Vista. They have multi-year contracts with Microsoft, unless a Linux format comes out that does everything Microsoft does (including sub group 2's desires) Mass Marketed PC makers will continue to buy license for Microsoft products. After all, Microsoft doesn't make money from its initial sale, not a per month accurment like with MMO's
From my knowledge, Wizards seems to lose between 10-15% of its audience per edition. Even Vista at most has lost 5-10% of Microsoft's market (and most of them will come back in the following years as Vista gets itself on track, just like with XP, just like 98 just like with 95).
See my sig. The Mystara community has pretty much moved there entirely. We basically maintain just enough presence here to let people know where to go for Mystara stuff.
Much appreciated!
It may lose 10-15% per edition, but how many does it gain? There are many many people who got started in 3.0 or 3.5 and there will be many people who get started in 4.0. So they lose 10-15% but gain... what 25%? more?
Yeah, and again it makes no difference.
If they gain 10% more gamers, and they do this with every edition, then overall they are growing the market. If they get more people it grows and grows.
I don't understand your posting sometimes. You call me a liar in one post, then are nice in another, then question what I say without backing up the question in yet another.
This is the important thing for all the grognards to remember, be ye 1e, 2e, or 3e. If you are not going to play 4e, you are not customers of Wizards of the Coast, and they feel no obligation to give you any special treatment or consideration, because you aren't helping their bottom line, you're only hurting it.
We can expect to be screwed more often, and harder each time, until every last grognard either changes over to 4e, or leaves.
Its good business from their standpoint. We contribute nothing to them, but we consume resources. We are a waste in every way to them. The sooner they can get rid of us, the better in their viewpoint.
It may lose 10-15% per edition, but how many does it gain? There are many many people who got started in 3.0 or 3.5 and there will be many people who get started in 4.0. So they lose 10-15% but gain... what 25%? more?
That has nothing to do with the persnicketiness of their customer base, which is why I saying they lose 10-15% of their customer base per edition. I would say, 10-15% loss with a yearly increase in total gamers of 4-5% meaning each edition (Not the .5 editions, full edition change overs, for the 10-15% loss people on the boards whine heavily about the .5 editions (be they Eldritch Witchery, Unearthed Arcana, Skills and Powers, or aptly named 3.5, I don't think they have a noticeable negative impact on populations) takes 3 years to reestablish its core. Each year probably sees 1-3% give up the hobby and another 2-5% pick up the hobby natively. Probably of the 10-15% 55% over the course of the edition will rejoin the DnD faithful but most these are based solely on internet forum trends which speak little of the population as a whole.
Needless to say however, there are a lot of people who don't play anymore, or play earlier editions. These people who play earlier editions, 3.x not withstanding, should have their own forum so they can talk specifically about what they like. Not 3.x, not 4E, but their own editions. I don't know why space becomes so limited that they can't allow this.
Which site(s)?
A whole group from the old OOP board just moved to this site:
http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/index.php
Are you kidding me? Thats like putting fire and gas in a oxygen rich room and expecting them to all co-exist and become best buddies. Your NUTZ!
No, I'm not kidding you. I honestly believe that given the minute numbers of Table-top RPG players in general, D&D players can not afford to keep dividing ourselves into hostile camps. In my experience the only way that any RPG can grow is by word of mouth, not by advertising, given the need for players who understand the rules enough to run a game. If you could drop your defensiveness about a decision made ten years ago by WotC, namely to design 3E and discontinue 2E, and consider that you are isolating yourself from people who share your hobby, you might be able to gain converts who want to play AD&D the way you feel it should be played. I am very familiar with the idea of isolating oneself in order to maintain doctrinal purity; it doesn't work for minority religious communities in the United States, I don't see why you think it should be emulated by AD&D players.
We had a nice home where flaming was at an incredible minimum. It was actually the most civil board on the entire forum. The only time it happened is when 3rd or 4thers would come there and try to tell us why we should switch.
In any event, I don't see how 1E/2E players are more inconvenienced than 3E players of Ravenloft or Dragonlance, who also lost their boards in the shuffle. Gamerzero told them the same thing: if there is so much Ravenloft, or Dragonlance or Dark Sun traffic, then those topics will be split off into their own boards again. In the meantime, the fans of Spelljammer and the fans of Birthright are not busy flaming each other; they just put headers on their posts so as not to inconvenience each other.
No, I'm not kidding you. I honestly believe that given the minute numbers of Table-top RPG players in general, D&D players can not afford to keep dividing ourselves into hostile camps. In my experience the only way that any RPG can grow is by word of mouth, not by advertising, given the need for players who understand the rules enough to run a game. If you could drop your defensiveness about a decision made ten years ago by WotC, namely to design 3E and discontinue 2E, and consider that you are isolating yourself from people who share your hobby, you might be able to gain converts who want to play AD&D the way you feel it should be played. I am very familiar with the idea of isolating oneself in order to maintain doctrinal purity; it doesn't work for minority religious communities in the United States, I don't see why you think it should be emulated by AD&D players.
That's not what is being discussed here. We're talking about signal to noise ratios. At Dragonsfoot there is a board for AD&D 1e, 2e and Basic. Posters at that site happily move around and post in those different forums, but they want to be clear about what they are posting about.
The OoP board here at Wizards was a much slower forum with far less traffic, so it was easy to keep abreast of what was happening. The D20 boards were insanely fast, any AD&D thread started there would be subject to flames and, if not, end up dead and buried within a couple of days.
Will the new out of print board behave similarly? It's too early to tell, but I would hazard a guess that there is going to be a lot more D20 traffic than AD&D.
Besides, RPGs aren't like religions. They aren't mutually exclusive. I like having somewhere separate to go to discuss different systems. Wizards decision is no big whoop to me, since we have plenty of places to go, but I can see why other people might be annoyed. Marginalising their concerns with a sort of "you're doing it wrong" outlook is just vaguely insulting.
You won't bring new players into the game through message boards, it just doesn't work. That's not what they are here for.
Besides, RPGs aren't like religions. They aren't mutually exclusive.
I disagree, based on some of the comments I've seen from 3.X players angry about 4E.
I don't agree with WoTC's new D&D game ideology
I don't agree with WoTC's business methodologies
I don't agree with WoTC's treatment of prior and potentially ongoing customers.
So, this will be the last day for me within their compound. Good luck to those who stay and I hope your experiences here are good. But if you find yourselves no longer demographically expedient, you know where you can find us. I'll see some of you other exiles on the island of lost toys.
Good bye
It may lose 10-15% per edition, but how many does it gain? There are many many people who got started in 3.0 or 3.5 and there will be many people who get started in 4.0. So they lose 10-15% but gain... what 25%? more?
Hardly.
On average, since the release of 3.0, which was their peak, the D&D customer base has declined more or less steadly at between 10 and 15 percent per fiscal quarter. (Source, Hasbro, Inc.) This was stalled for one quarter only at 3.5's release, which still resulted in a 5 percent overall drop.
At no time, ever, has WotC grown their Dungeons and Dragons base.
On average, since the release of 3.0, which was their peak, the D&D customer base has declined more or less steadly at between 10 and 15 percent per fiscal quarter. (Source, Hasbro, Inc.)
Cite, please. I'd love to see the source of this information.
Cite, please. I'd love to see the source of this information.
It's a pain in the ass to find, and not a direct link. But if you go to Hasbro's corporate site, into investors, the information appears on their information sheets. (Available in PDF form). It's buried under subsidiaries.
You'll also find out that WotC has posted a loss for every year since Hasbro's acquisition, not even including an 'operational loan' to keep WotC's door's open during the buyout.
Oh, and, currently, WotC is available for public purchase at $12M.
(Source, Hasbro, Inc.)
At no time, ever, has WotC grown their Dungeons and Dragons base.
I challenge you to present a Hasbro document that demonstrates such detailed information regarding WotC. Hasbro simply does not do this, even to those of us that own stock. We get to see annual (and even quarterly) revenue, profit, and loss of the divisions, but not profit/loss by product line.
Furthermore, WotC's largest money-line is Magic (the card game), making any examination of WotC revenues, profits, or losses less likely to be related to D&D than to Magic.
Your claim is spurious at best.
Falsified at worst.
Falsified at worst.
You're right in that the Hasbro report to stockholders only mentions the loss (which you didn't seem to debate). But do you honestly think that 4E would be so rushed, so messy, so sudden, and handled so poorly if it wasn't being done for a reason other that desperation? Do you think that Hasbro would be looking to ditch Wotc at a fraction of their purchase price if it was MAKING money?
You can also go on article and post after article and post on both M:TG and D&D's declining sales. WotC was forced to admit their losses in sales, specifically, at GDA because of their failed contracts with Atari. But, hey, sure, D&D 3.5 obviously returned to the glory days of the Red Box.
But, seriously, yes, I'm going to spill out bull about the cornerstone of my most favorite hobby just because I'm that kind of guy. Nevermind that this depresses the hell out of me, and makes me really worry about the bleak long-term future of my hobby.
I'm just here to make *everyone* feel bad.
Either that, or really I'm CONCERNED about this myopic direction and would like to see it reversed in some capacity?
I just rechecked their 2007 Annual Report and 2008 1Q Results and it doesn't mention anything about the profitability of Wizards or D&D. I went to Corporate Information: Investor Overview as suggested and I see no "information sheets". The subsidiary info in the Annual and Quarterly reports don't list profits or losses for Wizards.
WotC was forced to admit their losses in sales, specifically, at GDA
What's "GDA"?
Look, I'm not saying you're ill-intentioned. I just want to see the documents for myself, and I went where you suggested and they aren't there. So could you let me know where this information could be located?
Hasbro, to my knowledge, has never even reported the profitability of Wizards of the Coast, much less breaking data out by product line (such as Dungeons & Dragons, Magic: the Gathering, etc.). People have been searching for specific data on D&D since Hasbro acquired the company.
As I said, the information is buried in PDFs and not directly linkable. It's there, however, where I said it was.
But it doesn't dispute the main point anyway, that WotC has been burning a lot of bridges with its existing support base at a time it should be doing everything it can to woo them back in. Telling them, in no uncertain terms, that they aren't welcome anymore is a dumb move.
It's a pain in the ass to find, and not a direct link. But if you go to Hasbro's corporate site, into investors, the information appears on their information sheets. (Available in PDF form). It's buried under subsidiaries.
You'll also find out that WotC has posted a loss for every year since Hasbro's acquisition, not even including an 'operational loan' to keep WotC's door's open during the buyout.
The above information is untrue. I'm not able to provide additonal information as we're restrictied on commenting about finances and sales, since Hasbro is a public company.
However, I would encourage anyone who wants more information on Hasbro to go to the company website site and review the public documents.
But it doesn't dispute the main point anyway
It may not dispute your main point, but it sure as hell gets in the way of it.
Making false, spurious, or even simply inferred claims about the financial performance of the publisher of our favorite game is NOT valid support for an objection to the manner in which the company has handled the release of the newest edition of the game.
Anyway, it seems as if many of the OOP people have left for dragonsfoot... that's sad in my opinion.
Between us, we had literally hundreds of years of DMing experience, and I myself along with many others had posted for months to years on the what's a DM to do, / What's a player to do forums, helping out the non grogs who are full of problems that the vets solved years ago.
No longer. Good move.
Save a few bucks kill a forum, alienate the vets who are in the best position to help new DMs and players.
Much Win, not today.
But that's cool. Dragonsfoot visitors will benefit, as they have from the likes of Gygax, and the rest of the old guard, the foundation of "the game that no longer exists."
The interesting thing is that the oop boards group as a whole just wanted a place to hang out, and play, and retell the tales of our epic adventures.
Well in the past, decades ago, those that hated D&D drove us out of places we would gather. So we moved game locations.
If Dragonsfoot welcomes gamers, with threads for all sorts of old oop games, hey, that's where we're gonna be.
It's clear to me that I haven't seen a forums this combative since the release of NWN2. That pretty much shatterred the community of NWN gamers at Neverwinterconnections.com, who were disappointed with all the lies and half-truths and feet dragging on the Non-Existent DM client, delays, etc etc.
C'est la vie.
Don't bother about un-legacying OOP forums. Nobody will be around to man them.