gleichman wrote:
> tussock wrote:
>
>> d20Modern and Star Wars Saga edition are both labelled by WotC as
>> d20, as were all the optional rules variants in Unearth Arcana, or 4e
>> style stuff like the Book of Nine Swords: very few 3rd party d20 books
>> went further away from core DnD than those did, and most simply pushed
>> WotC to better respond to customer demand.
>
> All those came after some serious divergence from previous non-WotC D20
> games.
Hmm, perhaps. The bulk of 3rd-party d20 stuff throughout has been
pretty conservative design, but there was the occaisional oddball.
> With the cat out of the bag, WotC had a simple choice- either join them
> and tap the same market (and use it for future R&D as rumored elements
> of 4E show), or let others control the possible future of their market.
It's not "their" market, nor can it be well served by a single game
model due to the differing desires of the end users. The "direction" of
the market is to diversity and rules ploliferation, periodically folding
the best new ideas back into the old stalwarts. Always has been.
> It shouldn't be a suprise that they selected the former any more than it
> should be a surpise that they don't want to repeat that loss of control.
Bah humbug. /If/ they successfully prevent people doing interesting
things with compatable material, people will instead do interesting
things with /incompatable/ material, which will further segment the
community and make it harder to fold back the best new ideas into 5th
edition DnD.
The harder they squeeze, the more will slip through their fingers.
--
tussock
Zzzzzzzzzz... uh, wha? What the hell? I was sleeping, bugger off.
|
