Zitat:

---

Original von Absinth

Zitat:

---

Original von Canis

Zitat:

---

Original von Absinth
Naja, vielleicht steckt da eine teuflische Marketing-Idee hinter die ich nicht durchblicke

---

---

Heh! Zitieren sie gefälligst vernünftig! Das habe ich nie gesagt! Das ist ein Zitat von Mantis! Ich würde hier niemals mangelnden Durchblick eingestehen...

---

Ups, war keine Absicht. Habe mal meinen Originalpost geändert

__________________

Dieser Beitrag wurde von Canis am 07.08.2006, 07:19 Uhr editiert.

Update:

Auf www.enworld.org geht es munter weiter mit dem spekulieren.
Bleibt nur zu hoffen, daß sich WotC währen GenCon mal was offizielles zum Thema sagen, damit das Thema für eine Weile wieder verschwindet.
Bis zum nächsten Jahr....

__________________
Wo Lich(t) ist, ist auch Schatten(mann)



Achtung!
Jetzt kommt "Kultur":

Krawehl, krawehl! Trüb tauber Ginst am Musenhain, taub trüber Hain am Musenginst. Krawehl.

Ryan Dancey has given an opinion on 4E, marketing and the OGL over on the Open Gaming Foundation listservers:

3.5 will die, no question. Just as 3.0 died. Those labels are 95% marketing, 4% presentation, and 1% actual design differences. In other words, the king is dead, long live the king. The failure of the D20 publishing community to benefit (as WotC did) from the 3.5 transition was a MARKETING failure, not a DESIGN failure.

I think that having gone through this process once with the "3.5" release of D&D, publishers who want to hew close to the core elements of sword & sorcery fantasy represented by D&D will have a much better chance to navigate the transition to a new system than they did previously. They'll know to wind down new releases about 3 months prior to the new game's release, avoid the appearance that they produced products that can't be used post-transition and to pay close attention to the information coming out of WotC as to how the game system will be changing, to anticipate and incorporate that material into their products in advance of the release of the new material. They'll also know that they're being given a platform to go back and to "core" material again - the easiest, most popular content. That's just easy money. (Which WotC knew: witness the swift and successful release of the new "Complete" books right on the heels of 3.5.)

Based on little more than the sneak preview WotC provided at Winter Fantasy prior to the 3.5 release, it should have been possible for the D20 publishing community to do this the first time 'round, but so many publishers were caught up in the focus on getting products edited and published that they missed the larger picture - the danger that consumers really would draw a sharp distinction between 3.0 and 3.5, and apply that distinction even to 3rd party products. I think that happened BECAUSE 3.0 and 3.5 are functionally so similar from a deep-level design perspective. I doubt anyone will make that mistake again.

The kinds of changes we've talked about on this list - the move to a more miniatures centric packaging and design focus, smaller, cross-category integrated releases, changes to alter the need for an impartial DM - don't change the validity of the SRD. Imagine using the SRD to make D&D Miniatures supplements. It would be very easy to do so today, if anyone thought that doing so was worthwhile. The limitation of being able to put the D20 System Trademark on a miniature has apparently scared anyone capable of producing figures and support materials for the system out of the market - but if the whole franchise moves into that space, I cannot imagine that continuing.

With so much of the 30+ year legacy D&D game in the SRD, I believe it is impossible to ever make a game that would be accepted by the fans as "D&D" without it being possible to alter whatever is necessary to make the Open Game version of D&D compatible with whatever product is being currently sold as "D&D" by WotC. A game divergent enough to break that legacy with the SRD is simply not going to be tolerable to anyone vested in the D&D player network. Such a radical break would almost certainly result in a 3rd party version of the game, published under a new brand name, becoming the de-facto inheritor of the D&D player network externality, coming into direct competition with whatever faux "D&D" product is being marketed, and probably crushing it.

__________________
Frauen, zeitweise doch recht lecker, gehen nicht selten auf den Wecker...

Quot caelum stellas, tot velim libenter puellas!

Dice-Roller

Ich habs nicht verstanden

JimBobo

__________________
Ein Mann, der alles weiß, muß noch viel lernen.

" The kinds of changes we've talked about on this list - the move to a more miniatures centric packaging and design focus, smaller, cross-category integrated releases, changes to alter the need for an impartial DM - don't change the validity of the SRD. Imagine using the SRD to make D&D Miniatures supplements. It would be very easy to do so today, if anyone thought that doing so was worthwhile. The limitation of being able to put the D20 System Trademark on a miniature has apparently scared anyone capable of producing figures and support materials for the system out of the market - but if the whole franchise moves into that space, I cannot imagine that continuing."

ergo: vermutlich müssen WIR uns um die 4te edition keine großen gedanken machen...

__________________
Frauen, zeitweise doch recht lecker, gehen nicht selten auf den Wecker...

Quot caelum stellas, tot velim libenter puellas!

Dice-Roller

Wobei ich den nachfolgenden Absatz noch viel wichtiger finde. Denn das Internet und Seiten wir Enworld geben der community halt die Möglicheit, tatsächlich einen legitimen Nachfolger "auszufrufen", der notfalls nicht von WotC/Hasbro kommt.

Power to the people!

__________________
“I believe in benevolent dictatorship provided I am the dictator.”

- Richard Branson

Im Prinzip haben die Fans das Erscheinungsdatum einer neuen Edition selbst in der Hand. Solange wir jedes neu erscheinende Buch in ausreichender Stückzahl kaufen, gibt es für WotC keinen Grund 'ne neue Edition auf den Markt zu werfen.

__________________
It doesn't matter how this looks to other people. If this is something you gotta do, then you do it. Fighters fight.

- Rocky Balboa -

hm, ob das erpressung ist?

__________________
Frauen, zeitweise doch recht lecker, gehen nicht selten auf den Wecker...

Quot caelum stellas, tot velim libenter puellas!

Dice-Roller

Zitat:

---

Original von JS
hm, ob das erpressung ist?

---

Nö, eher Marketing

__________________

Noch ein paar Neuigkeiten:

Einfach mal von Enworld rüberkopiert:

Zitat:

---

Gaming Report's Dan Sivils spoke to D&D Associate Brand Manager, Kevin Wilson and other WotC officials at GenCon today. Kevin Wilson confirmed that: 1) WotC is not working on a 4E which will force players to use miniatures, and 2) no 4E products will be released in 2007.

It was also mentioned that WotC would be concentrating on the Winter Fantasy convention as its primary place to push D&D.

From the sounds of that (and this is just me extrapolating), a non-miniatures requiring 4E is being worked on and will be released in 2008. Put the Winter Fantasy comment above with the previous rumour that WotC didn't feel it important that they announce 4E at GenCon (presumably this year or next year), and we get a strong hint that D&D 4th Edition will be announced early next year at Winter Fantasy for a 2008 release - assuming WotC gives at least one year's warning as previously promised by Charles Ryan.

Kevin's exact quote was, according to GR, "...the show currently known as Winter Fantasy will be the primary place to push D&D, and 2007 will reveal a lot"; does this imply that Winter Fantasy will be changing in a major way? A name change seems likely, along with a heavier D&D release/announcement focus. I wouldn't want to speculate further than that, though.

---

__________________
It doesn't matter how this looks to other people. If this is something you gotta do, then you do it. Fighters fight.

- Rocky Balboa -

Dieser Beitrag wurde von Valerigon am 12.08.2006, 14:05 Uhr editiert.