tussock wrote:
> Dale Friesen wrote:
>
>>Del Rio wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I bet the
>>>idea behind the GSL is going to be, "let's let people create stuff that
>>>requires you to own D&D 4e books to play." I'm betting that the only
>>>version of the 4e rules that anyone will be allowed to publish will be
>>>in the D&D 4e core books, thus making them requirements in order to
>>>play any game that is based on the 4e equivalent of d20.
>>
>>Yes, I expect that to be the case, too.
>>
>>But is that so unreasonable?
>
>
> Yes. It's bad for their customers, bad for RPG writers, bad for the
> game stores, bad for the popularity of the hobby, and very bad for them
> in the long run due to all those factors.
>
>
>>It's costing them a bunch of money to create 4e, so if people are going
>>to be playing it then why shouldn't Hasbro require them to use the
>>Hasbro edition of the rules?
>
>
> Because 90% of a million people is less than 50% of two million.
They
> recover their costs best of all by growing the hobby, rather than
seeking
> to monopolise the tiny group of people that play it now.
>
> It'll sell less miniatures if there's no 3rd party flood of content
> for it, they'll have nothing to benchmark themselves against, and the
> next Mike Mearls might never come to be.
>
Another ****ning example of WotC short sighted planning. I never thought
I would say this, but I hope 4E goes down like the Bismarck. I hate what
Hasbro has done to my favorite game.
--
Tetsubo
--------------------------------------
"The apparent lesson of the Inquisition is that insistence on
uniformity of belief is fatal to intellectual, moral and spiritual
health."
-The Uses Of The Past-, Herbert J. Muller
BLUP
|
