1- NO real book going out for the next 8 months and probably nothing in the far future with the looks they are giving to this game with:
2- A silly game card to go with a RPG to give "flavor" according to what they are saying. Would say it is more like trying to be something they can't be, that is to say a franchise working. (Yes, i know... The buyer of D&D IS a manufacturer of cards... Could we get baseball cards?)
3- Trying to be a MMORPG around a table mean that you have to be as good as a real MMORPG (WoW as example). Why should I care about what they are doing since they are not professionnal in their doing, giving us bugged program to build our characters for which many of us are paying good money for it, silly cards games becasue they are short of ideas, and a shortage of new materials for building characters? To keep them alive (meaning continuing to pay for something that is not good...)?
MAY BE, as some say here, Hasbro the mighty will keep that thing active, but at least, it will not be this year that we will see the conclusion of the saga of a game destruction. They still have to do money with the stupid bunch of people (US) that still participate in all those forums. And as some say: "tell good about a product, or tell bad about a product, the really important matter is the fact that they are still talking about it
Errrr.... I don't really know what to say. I'm sure that there's legitimate gripes in there, but I really don't think that WotC is ready to kill the game.....????
Welcome to the forums.
Errrr.... I don't really know what to say. I'm sure that there's legitimate gripes in there, but I really don't think that WotC is ready to kill the game.....????
No, but Hasborg might be...
I like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
We would be more likely to accept the complaints as legitimate if they weren't phrased with ludicrous hyperbole like 'WotC wants to kill the game' and 'It's just an MMO on the table'. Looks like just another first-post-troller to me.
2- The fact that it is my first post should not mean that I am an idiot. Sadly, I am very sorry to not "qualify" as a forum-er since I have not posted 14,065 posts.
3- The fact that I am playing and have played D&D regularly since 1992, including 2 regular tables in Fourth Edition (so two nights of active playing) should "qualify" me at least as a respectable player, possibly not on par with some of you, but still "acceptable".
4- I will rectify my position a little about WotC ready to go for killing the game: Since they have Hasbro at their head, they have to find a way that Hasbro understand to keep this game alive, and they are trying hard to fill the needs of Hasbro, not the need of the players (US) which is understandable since all is first a question of money. At this point of time, their last tries are empty for us BUT may be OK for Hasbro. Is there a volonteer here ready to say that what they are giving us this year is really acceptable? For my part, I don't really care of new books, etc since I have played mainly one class (cleric) since 1992 and to some extent, I am satisfied of what I have even if they could have given more BUT I would expect a little more for other players than what YOU will get this year.
5- Interesting to see that Heroes of Shadow and New bestiary are satisfying peoples for an 8 months period from an industry that was giving us a new book nearly each month, but why have books when we all have D&D Insider!
6- Why should I not say that D&D is trying to convince me that it is a MMORPG on a table? I see what I see with all the changes they have done in all those years, and it is a MMORPG on a table (guild) with some friends around (chat) with a story tell to us by a gamemaster (raid leader) conducting us to a climax killing a boss, with one small difference being the interaction LIVE of players since they are all sitting around a table discussing the game and trying to solve by Roleplaying social skills instead of combat (which we all know is not important in D&D) + other things we have in common in Real life like children, wife, wine, situation in Libya, economy, etc...
And there's some legitimate complaints there.
But I respectfully disagree.
I don'r think WotC is detroying the game.
I think th game will be healthy for a little while longer.
But what do I know ....
1- The fact that I have not written in forums don't mean I have not read them; my main issue here is the limitation I have to write fluently in english, being french-canadian.
Actually, your English is better than some. I was able to understand you.
2- The fact that it is my first post should not mean that I am an idiot. Sadly, I am very sorry to not "qualify" as a forum-er since I have not posted 14,065 posts.
That your first post accused Wizards of intentionally trying to kill the Dungeons & Dragons brand is certainly enough to lead people to beleive you are a forum troll.
3- The fact that I am playing and have played D&D regularly since 1992, including 2 regular tables in Fourth Edition (so two nights of active playing) should "qualify" me at least as a respectable player, possibly not on par with some of you, but still "acceptable".
It means that you are a player of Dungeons & Dragons with an opinion. By itself, your opinion is no more valuable than mine, and mine is no more valuable than yours. I've been playing since 1979. Does that mean that I "outrank" you?
The difference between us is that I have given the new material a fair shake, it doesn't disrupt my games, so I have no reason to dislike it. Are you willing to do the same, or do you wish to hold tenaciously to your uninformed opinion?
4- I will rectify my position a little about WotC ready to go for killing the game: Since they have Hasbro at their head, they have to find a way that Hasbro understand to keep this game alive, and they are trying hard to fill the needs of Hasbro, not the need of the players (US) which is understandable since all is first a question of money. At this point of time, their last tries are empty for us BUT may be OK for Hasbro. Is there a volonteer here ready to say that what they are giving us this year is really acceptable? For my part, I don't really care of new books, etc since I have played mainly one class (cleric) since 1992 and to some extent, I am satisfied of what I have even if they could have given more BUT I would expect a little more for other players than what YOU will get this year.
We are getting one campaign, two books full of player options, one monster book, one setting expansion, one super adventure. The most recent releases are empty for you, but some of us like them, probably more than you think, and definitely more than you are prepared to admit.
5- Interesting to see that Heroes of Shadow and New bestiary are satisfying peoples for an 8 months period from an industry that was giving us a new book nearly each month, but why have books when we all have D&D Insider!
Heroes of Shadow in April, Gloomwrought and beyond in May, Monster Vault 2 in June, Neverwinter in August, Madness at Gardmore Abbey in September, Heroes of the Feywild in November.
We are in a recession here in the U.S. (it may have escaped your notice in Canada), many of us have felt a crunch on our disposable income. Even before I was laid off, I couldn't afford to buy a book a month. Slowing down the release schedule lessens the bite on our wallets (good for us) and gives them more time to test things, reducing the amount of errata necessary (good for us and for Wizards).
6- Why should I not say that D&D is trying to convince me that it is a MMORPG on a table? I see what I see with all the changes they have done in all those years, and it is a MMORPG on a table (guild) with some friends around (chat) with a story tell to us by a gamemaster (raid leader) conducting us to a climax killing a boss, with one small difference being the interaction LIVE of players since they are all sitting around a table discussing the game and trying to solve by Roleplaying social skills instead of combat (which we all know is not important in D&D) + other things we have in common in Real life like children, wife, wine, situation in Libya, economy, etc...
I hate to say this, as it may bust your bubble. The table top game came first. Even in the BECMI era, the game was played on a table (guild - although to be honest, I have no frakkin' idea what you are getting at with this one, but I'm using your analogy and terminology), with some friends (chat - really, this should be the guild, and that table should be the chat interface), with a story told to us by a Dungeon Master (raid leader) conducting us to a climax (killing a boss).
Dungeons and Dragons had all of these elements in 1975 when it was first published, and it has them now. We still play with each other, LIVE, and solving roleplaying problems by roleplaying, and combat problems by fighting imaginary monsters with our imaginations.
World of Warcraft and Everquest owe their existence to us, the D&D players, not the other way around.
I like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
Yep. Much like making juvenile shots with mangled names like "Hasborg".
I like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
Yep. Much like making juvenile shots with mangled names like "Hasborg".
Basically. I had said before that new posters that acted like the sky was falling would get, from me, only the
or the 
smilie. They deserve nothing more, really. If they want to be taken seriously, they need to not enter the forum in full panic/paranoia/conspiracy mode.lokiare is blocked from my sight for this reason. The only time I respond is if I choose to read his posts. Which now, I rarely do.
I like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
Yep. Much like making juvenile shots with mangled names like "Hasborg".
Basically. I had said before that new posters that acted like the sky was falling would get, from me, only the
lokiare is blocked from my sight for this reason. The only time I respond is if I choose to read hims posts. Which now, I rarely do.
This is pretty funny since I'm neither new nor prone to panic. I'm merely obnoxious...
1- The fact that I have not written in forums don't mean I have not read them; my main issue here is the limitation I have to write fluently in english, being french-canadian.
Actually, your English is better than some. I was able to understand you.2- The fact that it is my first post should not mean that I am an idiot. Sadly, I am very sorry to not "qualify" as a forum-er since I have not posted 14,065 posts.
That your first post accused Wizards of intentionally trying to kill the Dungeons & Dragons brand is certainly enough to lead people to beleive you are a forum troll.3- The fact that I am playing and have played D&D regularly since 1992, including 2 regular tables in Fourth Edition (so two nights of active playing) should "qualify" me at least as a respectable player, possibly not on par with some of you, but still "acceptable".
It means that you are a player of Dungeons & Dragons with an opinion. By itself, your opinion is no more valuable than mine, and mine is no more valuable than yours. I've been playing since 1979. Does that mean that I "outrank" you?
The difference between us is that I have given the new material a fair shake, it doesn't disrupt my games, so I have no reason to dislike it. Are you willing to do the same, or do you wish to hold tenaciously to your uninformed opinion?4- I will rectify my position a little about WotC ready to go for killing the game: Since they have Hasbro at their head, they have to find a way that Hasbro understand to keep this game alive, and they are trying hard to fill the needs of Hasbro, not the need of the players (US) which is understandable since all is first a question of money. At this point of time, their last tries are empty for us BUT may be OK for Hasbro. Is there a volonteer here ready to say that what they are giving us this year is really acceptable? For my part, I don't really care of new books, etc since I have played mainly one class (cleric) since 1992 and to some extent, I am satisfied of what I have even if they could have given more BUT I would expect a little more for other players than what YOU will get this year.
We are getting one campaign, two books full of player options, one monster book, one setting expansion, one super adventure. The most recent releases are empty for you, but some of us like them, probably more than you think, and definitely more than you are prepared to admit.5- Interesting to see that Heroes of Shadow and New bestiary are satisfying peoples for an 8 months period from an industry that was giving us a new book nearly each month, but why have books when we all have D&D Insider!
Heroes of Shadow in April, Gloomwrought and beyond in May, Monster Vault 2 in June, Neverwinter in August, Madness at Gardmore Abbey in September, Heroes of the Feywild in November.
We are in a recession here in the U.S. (it may have escaped your notice in Canada), many of us have felt a crunch on our disposable income. Even before I was laid off, I couldn't afford to buy a book a month. Slowing down the release schedule lessens the bite on our wallets (good for us) and gives them more time to test things, reducing the amount of errata necessary (good for us and for Wizards).6- Why should I not say that D&D is trying to convince me that it is a MMORPG on a table? I see what I see with all the changes they have done in all those years, and it is a MMORPG on a table (guild) with some friends around (chat) with a story tell to us by a gamemaster (raid leader) conducting us to a climax killing a boss, with one small difference being the interaction LIVE of players since they are all sitting around a table discussing the game and trying to solve by Roleplaying social skills instead of combat (which we all know is not important in D&D) + other things we have in common in Real life like children, wife, wine, situation in Libya, economy, etc...
I hate to say this, as it may bust your bubble. The table top game came first. Even in the BECMI era, the game was played on a table (guild - although to be honest, I have no frakkin' idea what you are getting at with this one, but I'm using your analogy and terminology), with some friends (chat - really, this should be the guild, and that table should be the chat interface), with a story told to us by a Dungeon Master (raid leader) conducting us to a climax (killing a boss).
Dungeons and Dragons had all of these elements in 1975 when it was first published, and it has them now. We still play with each other, LIVE, and solving roleplaying problems by roleplaying, and combat problems by fighting imaginary monsters with our imaginations.
World of Warcraft and Everquest owe their existence to us, the D&D players, not the other way around.
1- Ty for saying that you have understood my english.
2- Fair enough
3- Yes, you outrank me; experience is something valuable even if younger generations may think otherwise (MY opinion, so don't shout/shoot at me). Also, I am giving a fair shake to new materials. Was simply stating that, even at worst times of D&D, we have had more important books than the ones coming on a period of one year. I am not saying that it is not important for some players, but simply stating that you could have wished for more. As I stated for my part, this year will be nearly like last year, which was not a good one BUT neither was it a bad one as far as materials go.
4- I do understand that USA has been wildly more touched by the recession than Canada was; I could easily understand that you (at wide) have less budget than usual, so if it is that way, could it have been more useful to have better books than "conplementary" books or creation of new setting, or else (particularly since WotC/Hasbro is keenly aware of the fact you have less money than usual)? Do remember that personnally, I am not really touched by those books but that i will buy them to see what is new. So, i am giving them a fair chance for me. I have more cause of concerns for others about this.
5-You don't bust my bubble and I do appreciate the fact that you have "stated" the right order for this. I should have been clearer on what I have said. I am "feeling" (I know... an opinion) that WotC is searching itself where to go and is doing reverse engineering for some of the things they are implementing in their game by looking elsewhere, something we (or at least I) have not seen from them very often. Is it wrong to do reverse engineering and get ideas from others who have stolen some of their ideas? Probably not. BUT when a live game look nearer to a computer game than it was, should I not be disrupted by that or simply get the computer game and play it?
6- Your explaination of the table-guild-chat-raid leader is far better accurate than mine.
1- Ty for saying that you have understood my english.
Actually, I meant to pay you a greater compliment than that. Your English is not just better than some, it is better than some of the native speakers who come to this board.
3- Yes, you outrank me; experience is something valuable even if younger generations may think otherwise (MY opinion, so don't shout/shoot at me). Also, I am giving a fair shake to new materials. Was simply stating that, even at worst times of D&D, we have had more important books than the ones coming on a period of one year. I am not saying that it is not important for some players, but simply stating that you could have wished for more. As I stated for my part, this year will be nearly like last year, which was not a good one BUT neither was it a bad one as far as materials go.
As long as the opinion is well informed and arrived at via reason, my "rank" is meaningless compared to yours. They are still just opinions, though.
The most important books we get in any given year is the Player's Handbook and the Campaign Setting. We lose the Player's Handbook for Heroes of Shadow and Heroes of the Feywild this year, and we are still getting the campaign setting.
Would I prefer that Heroes of Shadow had been Player's Handbook 4? Sure. But I'm still interested and excited to see the material in Heroes of Shadow and figure out how to incorporate it into my games and my characters.
5-You don't bust my bubble and I do appreciate the fact that you have "stated" the right order for this. I should have been clearer on what I have said. I am "feeling" (I know... an opinion) that WotC is searching itself where to go and is doing reverse engineering for some of the things they are implementing in their game by looking elsewhere, something we (or at least I) have not seen from them very often. Is it wrong to do reverse engineering and get ideas from others who have stolen some of their ideas? Probably not. BUT when a live game look nearer to a computer game than it was, should I not be disrupted by that or simply get the computer game and play it?
Gaming has evolved quite a bit since 1975 when D&D first hit the scene. D&D has been extremely slow at evolving with it. I'm willing to bet that if D&D were not the 800 lb. gorilla that it was, that the lack of significant advancement that was 3.x would have killed it. In order to attract and appeal to a new generation of gamers, D&D needed to grow up and get out of its parents' basement. All of D&D's friends and playmates (GURPS, Shadowrun, Hero System, World of Darkness, L5R, heck even Arduin tried to break away from the cheap powergamer knock-off of D&D that it started as) evolved and changed while D&D stagnated.
There is a certain comfort in the familiar, thus we have the success of Pathfinder, but growth and evolution requires innovation. There is no shame in looking to those that have innovated from your labors in your own quest for innovation. D&D has always been, at its heart, about team based play and cooperation. However, as D&D grew from BECMI to 3.x, the focus on system mastery being its own reward obviated the need for the team, as one well optimized character could trivialize encounters on their own.
By taking a cue from the roles found in cooperative MMOs, and clearly defining character roles in D&D, they have brought the team back into focus in D&D.
The tabletop experience and a live GM are things that no MMO can duplicate, and when AI is advanced enough for computers to simulate it, Skynet will have more important things to do, such as eradicating humanity, or we will all be slaves to the Matrix (which, in providing a simulated life experience for us, we will still need to GM for each other "live" over a tabletop, rendering the fact that we are all simply roleplaying through a computer generated scenario irrelevant, as we will be unaware of same).
I like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
We would be more likely to accept the complaints as legitimate if they weren't phrased with ludicrous hyperbole like 'WotC wants to kill the game' and 'It's just an MMO on the table'. Looks like just another first-post-troller to me.
Right.
Gods know I'm no fan of how WotC has been run in the past year or so, and I share many of the OP's concerns. The problem is there's this idea of... I don't know... it's like people think WotC hates us and wants us to be unhappy or something, and that's just dumb, and it doesn't do much to add any legitimacy to actual concerns about the direction of the game.
I don't think Hasbro is a good match for D&D, but they do want it to be successful, only their tools are all hammers when the problem is a screw. I don't like many of the decisions made by WotC recently, but I understand the decisions are being made by reasonable people who really do love this game, but are in a very difficult position.
In all seriousness, there is a an article just put out today that helps address this.
Also, I would say that it is time for a slow down. Yes I would say that the game is trailing, due to many factors. This may lead to hiatus, and we will be sad if this happens (excpet for the "I told you so" 'ers and the "I new it in 2009" 'ers).
One thing I would ask is: is D&D not an MMORPG? Is it bad if it is?
Certainly an MMORPG is not the right phrasing, since that refers to an online game, but D&D is communal, community driven. It's not like finalfantasy, chrono trigger, Dragon Quest, Fable, or pretty much anyother single player RPG. It depends on people to work. It is Massive and Multiplayer.
D&Di has always existed as Dragon Magazine and Dungeon Magazine. So it's not fair to say that the content is suffering because of that. the game was released at breakneck speed with D&Di being around.
I do think Hasbro at the helm has some dark ramifications, but it's still early yet to say the intent is to kill/or mutate the game into something else.
LokaireI like how some poster like to undermine legitimate complaints and speculation with little smilies that run around and panic... its so quaint and fallacy filled...
We are Hasborg. resistance is futile. Your RPG's and your very imaginations will adapt to service us.
html_removed
html_removed
html_removed
The Panic smilies are dancing to "Champions of Trance" right now.
The Panic smilies are dancing to "Champions of Trance" right now.
creepy. That's what I was listening....
you don't think it means anything do you?
The Panic smilies are dancing to "Champions of Trance" right now.
creepy. That's what I was listening....
you don't think it means anything do you?
Not sure. I was listening to it on Last.fm.
I listened to the song, and somehow ended up listening to Caramelldansen. Thanks a lot guys. Panic mode is over.
Caramelldansen is always good for relieving panic. Perhaps the OP needs to listen to that song more, and worry about the future of D&D less (see, I am on topic!).
It is interesting to see how far the peoples at WotC/D&D are ready to go to kill this game and to try to make us believe that they are knowing what they are doing:
1- NO real book going out for the next 8 months and probably nothing in the far future with the looks they are giving to this game with:
2- A silly game card to go with a RPG to give "flavor" according to what they are saying. Would say it is more like trying to be something they can't be, that is to say a franchise working. (Yes, i know... The buyer of D&D IS a manufacturer of cards... Could we get baseball cards?)
3- Trying to be a MMORPG around a table mean that you have to be as good as a real MMORPG (WoW as example). Why should I care about what they are doing since they are not professionnal in their doing, giving us bugged program to build our characters for which many of us are paying good money for it, silly cards games becasue they are short of ideas, and a shortage of new materials for building characters? To keep them alive (meaning continuing to pay for something that is not good...)?
MAY BE, as some say here, Hasbro the mighty will keep that thing active, but at least, it will not be this year that we will see the conclusion of the saga of a game destruction. They still have to do money with the stupid bunch of people (US) that still participate in all those forums. And as some say: "tell good about a product, or tell bad about a product, the really important matter is the fact that they are still talking about it
I'm no fan of Wizards, but them putting out a book a week wouldn't be indicative of their loving the game, nor would it be any indication all was well with the game either. In fact shovelling out volume over quantity likely would kill the game faster than a great lack of any content at all.
There are only so many logical tomes possible under the guise of Player products and DM products, whether you and your infinite wallet like it or not.
Sure we can all likely think of 3 books would love to see print, and the fact is, maybe YOU should write them. Any reason why YOU are not writing them?
the forums light up when they dont release 2 books a month of players options, yet you expect a smaller publisher to somehow come up with the resources and manpower to release more/better stuff?
how is that possible? if D&D was moved to a smaller publisher then DDI, dragon/dragon, and the volume of products would decrease or be dropped compleatly.
trust me im no fan of big powerful corporations, but in the case of D&D smaller is not going to be better.
a smaller company would not yeild the amount of content that Hasbro can, they just wouldent have the resources and that would cause you guys to rage all over the forums about how D&D is about to die and a bunch of people posting
signs all over the place, kinda like it is now exept i dont have a book to readThere's been a change of direction, certainly. We had the violent shift in design philosophy from Essentials. A major shift in format, from big hardbounds to digest-sized softbacks - often in half-empty boxes. We've had a second, stronger push towards cards, this time unabashedly CCG style. The CB went from client to on-line only. And now we have a sudden throttling back in production.
Could be the negative reaction to Essentials was enough to get them to re-think the 'new direction,' so they're re-doing stuff. Could be Hasbro has just slashed their resources to the point they can't deliver. Could be that resources are being put into producing 5e...
There's been a change of direction, certainly. We had the violent shift in design philosophy from Essentials. A major shift in format, from big hardbounds to digest-sized softbacks - often in half-empty boxes. We've had a second, stronger push towards cards, this time unabashedly CCG style. The CB went from client to on-line only. And now we have a sudden throttling back in production.
Could be the negative reaction to Essentials was enough to get them to re-think the 'new direction,' so they're re-doing stuff. Could be Hasbro has just slashed their resources to the point they can't deliver. Could be that resources are being put into producing 5e...
These all seem plauseable, as for the new online CB it is crap compared to the offline CB and dragon and dungeon have been crap for sometime so that agument is moot. I would rather have someone with a clear idea and direction for the game than what is going on with wizards cause they don't seem to know which way is up currently. I blame hasbro 100% for this.
how is that possible? if D&D was moved to a smaller publisher then DDI, dragon/dragon, and the volume of products would decrease or be dropped compleatly.
trust me im no fan of big powerful corporations, but in the case of D&D smaller is not going to be better.
a smaller company would not yeild the amount of content that Hasbro can, they just wouldent have the resources and that would cause you guys to rage all over the forums about how D&D is about to die and a bunch of people posting
You do realize that Paizo (which is a smaller company) did Dragon and Dungeon magazine for years, and btw did a much better job at it then the online slowly dying beast we have now. The latest problem being, we are too lazy to actually make issues of our online magazine please download each article and the updates whenever they occur, though we won't actually tell you when that happens. And frankly the New CB is much worse then several of the free versions for previous versions of D&D and a huge step back from the previous effort.
At an average of 20-30 color pictures/book, and estimating an extremely low cost of $500/picture, thats still $10-15,000 in artwork costs alone, and I should know - I am an artist myself and even as a complete unknown, I have been able to charge $250-300/canvas without people even batting an eyelid and my art is far from the quality found in D&D products.
For those who don't believe me, a few years ago I approached Larry Elmore to inquire about commissioning cover art for a product I am working on, and was initially quoted $3000 (for a detailed piece), but after further discussion managed to haggle the price down to $850 for one figure and a bit of background (something still far outside my price bracket) and only under limited licence.
IIRC, I remember the 4E Dev's saying it cost some $2.7 million to research, develop, and compile the 4E core books, and while I'm sure that the cost to publish expansions are only a small fraction of this, I can easily see them coming in at the $30,000 mark once you factor in wages, editing, artwork, etc.
At an average of 20-30 color pictures/book, and estimating an extremely low cost of $500/picture, thats still $10-15,000 in artwork costs alone, and I should know - I am an artist myself and even as a complete unknown, I have been able to charge $250-300/canvas without people even batting an eyelid and my art is far from the quality found in D&D products.
For those who don't believe me, a few years ago I approached Larry Elmore to inquire about commissioning cover art for a product I am working on, and was initially quoted $3000 (for a detailed piece), but after further discussion managed to haggle the price down to $850 for one figure and a bit of background (something still far outside my price bracket) and only under limited licence.
Methinks I have underestimated what the right market could do for my art.
you know the claim that D&D would be better with a smaller company doesent make any sense
That's not what I said, or rather, you're misinterpreting what I said.
The problem with Hasbro is they expect a certain return for their investment: their company runs at about 15% profit, so anything that operates below that is expected to improve. If, as I believe, D&D cannot produce a 15% profit as a PnP RPG, then they will change it into a form that can, ie CCGs, Board Games, Video Games, while removing elements that are unprofitable, like Printed Supplements and free errata.
A smaller company does not require a 15% profit margin, and so would be less likely to fiddle with a system which is (by their lower metrics) working just fine.
I think the best we can hope for is that Hasbro license out (not sell, that doesn't make any sense to them) the D&D PnP game to a smaller company, probably Paizo, since they're the ones in the best position to take it over.
A smaller company does not require a 15% profit margin, and so would be less likely to fiddle with a system which is (by their lower metrics) working just fine.
I think you're wrong because percentages are relative. A smaller company might expect a smaller absolute profit but they would be investing less (because they have less). The percentage may very well be expected to remain the same (it might very well be higher because a smaller company wouldn't have diverse revenue streams, who knows?).
Also, I don't read Hasbro's financial statements so is there a link you can post that shows they expect a flat 15% (or more) return on investment on all product lines?
EDIT: I want to add that I'm not a fan of corporations in general but it has nothing to do with perceived value of the products they produce. It's because they foster a culture of non culpability. And when I say "non culpability" I'm talking about ETHICS. Something like: "Sorry we hired chinese children to produce this product for less than five cents a day! Our investors just expect ROI!!!!"
EDIT: I want to add that I'm not a fan of corporations in general but it has nothing to do with perceived value of the products they produce. It's because they foster a culture of non culpability. And when I say "non culpability" I'm talking about ETHICS. Something like: "Sorry we hired chinese children to produce this product for less than five cents a day! Our investors just expect ROI!!!!"
Non-culpability is more than just ethics though. The more people are involved in making a decision the more the blame is spread amongst them, so nobody really feels responsible for failures.
3E was about optimization. Themes, backgrounds and fortune cards seem to heading that way. And people still want more.
2E had kits. Essentials classes seem to be kits all over again.
Three of our major products this year are board games.
So is contemporary D&D supposed to be 2E? 3E? a board game? What happened to it being 4E?
Just to chime in my own opinion, I'm a little disappointed by this years releases, but I'm not going to blame Hasbro or anyone for that, since I don't work at WotC and don't know who makes the decisions.
I'm just disappointed, because other than Heroes of Shadow, it doesn't seem like there's anything I'm really excited about this year.
Gloomwrought should be neat, but pretty specific; i.e. if you don't run a game there, the material is of limited use. (Note I said limited; I'm aware you can canabalize material for use elsewhere.)
The Monster Vault concerns me; are we going to get a book of monsters we've already seen with some twists? I know there's some new ones in there from the pictures that have been revealed, but there was also a pic of what looks like a Bronze Warder and a White Dragon there. Also, it suffers from the previous complaint, it's focused on the Nentir Vale. Great, if you're running a default D&D game, less useful if you're running a specialized one.
Heroes of the Feywild is of some interest to me, but so far off it's hard for me to get exicted about it.
The Neverwinter Campaign setting holds almost no interest for me. I'm not a big fan of the Forgotten Realms setting, so that explains this. Yes, I know, there's possibly info in there I can canabalize, and probably will, but if it's like the Forgotten Realms campaign book (of which I bought only for the Swordmage class and the two race write-ups).
I realize, that most, if not all of this, is personal opinion, and thus I don't expect everyone to agree with me (or disagree with me), but this is what I'm feeling about this year's release schedule.
I think the best we can hope for is that Hasbro license out (not sell, that doesn't make any sense to them) the D&D PnP game to a smaller company, probably Paizo, since they're the ones in the best position to take it over.
nope not the best the worst . I dont want this creative game under the control of a company without the chingas to creative.