# WotC president Greg Leeds and I!!!



## Brix (Apr 14, 2009)

Because of the recent developements with regards to WotC halting pdf sales and the ongoing complains about 4E and the treatment of original campaign settings I followed Jason Sonia's suggestion at the Paizo boards to contact Hasbro executives directly, telling them my concerns about D&D - the game I love and play for more than 20 years now.
It worked. A few hours later I got an email from Greg Leeds, who offered me talk to me directly via phone:


_Dear Markus,

Hello, I am Greg Leeds, President of Wizards of the Coast. Your note was sent to me and I thought we could talk by phone about your thoughts. As you know, we are not perfect but we are trying our best to create a great gaming experience for as many gamers as possible._

Of course I was surprised by that, but took the opportunity to tell him my point of view, which is certainly shared by many people if I consider countless message board postings.
Since Mr. Leeds is away for a few days we will phone next week. When I have the opportunity to talk to the president of WotC I will not use the time to complain more about the situation, but to present ideas what WotC could do to make us 3E people happy again.

*Therefore I ask you: "What would you do if you were Greeg Leeds, president of WotC in the current situation?"*

That means I collect as many ideas as possible from you and present them to Mr. Leeds. So please share you positive ideas at wherever you find this posting. The more people take part in this survey the better. As I hope we all will benefit from that opportunity.

Looking forward your responses here or at www.3point75.org

*UPDATE:*
In order to make it easier for me to file your ideas and solutions about how to pimp WotC please refer to the following topics only:

* 4E (WoW-like game not liked by many)
* Licence issues (OGL, GSL)
* Setting support (e.g. New Forgotten Realms alienating old fans)
* pdf policy
* Layoffs of fan favorite designers
* Cancellation of print magazines
* D&D Insider

Thanks.

Hey folks, Piratecat here. I was curious, so I checked with Wizards and this turns out to be absolutely true. Please respond accordingly. Thanks.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 14, 2009)

Right.

Edit: Sorry about that, not in a million years would I have thought this to be legit.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 14, 2009)

As a 3.5 fan, I think the WotC/4E ship has sailed.  

I really don't have anything I'd want to say to or ask Greg Leeds at this point.

It's time to move on.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Apr 14, 2009)

Where's Ashton? Come on, where is he? 'Cause someone is being Punk'd!


----------



## Arkobla Conn (Apr 14, 2009)

I'll try

4e is blatantly about the money and not about the game.  We understand that WOTC is a company that needs to generate revenue - thats ok.  What we don't like is what they did to do it. 

4e is too different.  Most of us would have happily bought 4e regardless of how much change it brought on, but many of us would have been Happier had it not completely made our extensive 3.5 collection obsolete.  Not only did they change the rules, but they also changed the fluff...making it all worthless in todays current gaming environment.  Not cool

The rule changes for 4e were too drastic and too focused on dungeon crawls.  Somewhere after 1st edition but before 4th edition, roleplaying in a fantasy environment spanned much more than dungeon delving.  Those games could be played without a table, mat, figures and a hundred different marks...  4e took D&D from a game of imagination into the realm of tactics.  It feels like 'New Coke'...  Shares the same name, but is totally different.  

It should be said that as a tactical game...as a first game for New players, 4e has a lot going for it.  It clearly highlights player options making it an easier experience....but to older players (30 years here), the game feels constricting.  The powers DO what the powers say they do...and almost all of the deal damage.  No more using great imagination with a power to yield a result your DM has to think about.    

We understand the 3.5 grew out of control in certain areas.  We knew it had to be fixed.  But instead of fixing our game, you threw it out and started new.  Boo on that.  You could have opted to go along the lines of Star Wars Saga, which seemed to be an intellegent mix of what was and new...but you lept over that intellegent design into ... 4e as it stands today.

Not all has been bad - I love the 4e character builder - it's really the best character builder I've ever used.  But even with the Compendium online, it pales in comparison to what you promised.  I was at Gen Con 07 when you announced the game table and character visualizer and PDFs for each purchased book.  I was at Winter Fantasy 08 when I saw the game table DEMOd by WOTC employees.   And it looked good.  Where are these promises now?  In my business, you don't announce things you aren't sure you can deliver on...what happens in your business?  It comes off as false pretenses to get many of us to pay prematurely for DDI.  

I do like that DDI includes the two magazines, but hate that the magazines are now solely 4e.  What happened to Dragon's look at the industry as a whole?  You've lost something here.  No longer can Dungeons and Dragons stand up to the competion (I guess) because it is too afraid to give the competion it's advertising space.  Very sad.

I wish I could stop, but the transgressions are greater than that.  Your product quality is shoddy - smearing ink, flimsy books, bad bindings, reused artwork.  Take out the Forgotten Realms Players Guide from 3.5 and the one from 4.0 and tell me the quality is the same!  The obvious love put into 3.5s book vs the clinical look of 4.0's version is startling.  

I wish that some of the adventure writing would overcome these transgressions...but it doesn't.  Most of the early stuff was so bad (and made so very little sense) that my players have begged me to stop buying them.  They are too long, too combat oriented, horribly written and make no world sense (monsters fight til death too often...or can't hear combat in the next room too often...) that I'm no longer able to use them.  I don't have time to create new adventures at my age...but thats exactly what I have to do to keep my players playing.

And how do you reward the team you assembled?  You lay them off.  Nothing comes as more a shock to the system as when a corporation lays off people who have been working hard for them as a layoff.  I know it's tough out there, but a corporation like Hasbro couldn't have found work for these talented folks??  

What does this say??  Add in the PDF fiasco and you get a company who promised many things, kept very few of them, destroyed an iconic game by making it juvinile and too focused in one aspect of our hobby, and makes decision after decision based upon the almighty dollar...instead of what's right for the hobby, the game and the gamers.  I guess that's WOTCs right...but very soon it'll be our right to really hit you where it hurts by not buying those new products.  I guess we won't get shiny new any more...but we have enough to play with in past versions.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 14, 2009)

I have confirmation from WotC PR that this is absolutely true! Pretty cool. Folks, please respond accordingly.


----------



## Sigma (Apr 14, 2009)

Wow.

Okay, given that this is legit, is there any chance we can limit the conversation to topics that actually might receive consideration by Leeds?  Going in with a rambling diatribe about 4e isn't going to do anything - it's going to result in WotC ignoring anything constructive that may be said and assuming they are dealing with a bunch of angry, irrational fans and that they are justified in ignoring anything critical that might be said.

I would ask if they would reconsider putting up the pdfs of the out-of-print books which they don't have in stock.  The piracy concerns for those books are negligble and it would be seen as a gesture of goodwill towards the fans.  

This is an amazing opportunity to effect some good change and demonstrate that there are fans of WotC who are reasonable, but upset.  Attacking 4e is not a good use of that opportunity.


----------



## Voadam (Apr 14, 2009)

PDF policy.

I would suggest selling pdfs of old edition stuff until you have a new system in place you wish to sell them under. Removing legal sale opportunities does not eliminate the pirated copies that already exist, it just means nobody can pay you for the legal ones. There is demand for legally purchasing old edition pdfs, the work has already been done, and the costs of hosting and managing the distribution of them are borned by the pdf distributors, this seems to be pure ongoing profit, small as it is.

For newer 4e ones if you wish to avoid the instant pirating from quality pdf copies issue I would suggest delaying release of pdfs until after the period you feel is appropriate. Pirates will scan and OCR from physical books, but delaying for that transaction time will avoid the instant downloads.

If not then please explain how WotC believes pirating is hurting WotC and how removing the pdfs will benefit WotC. These do not appear clear right now.

Wishlist suggestion, reduce the price of the oop 3e pdfs and the current 4e pdfs. $20 was my personal cut off for eventually purchasing a 4e PH or MM pdf to try out the system. I wasn't buying 4e stuff for the same reason I wasn't getting exalted books, they both sounded neat but I'm happy with 3e and the pdf prices were too high to tempt me to check out a new system when there is plenty of other cheap gaming pdfs of things I am interested in.


----------



## Mournblade94 (Apr 14, 2009)

Sigma said:


> Wow.
> 
> Okay, given that this is legit, is there any chance we can limit the conversation to topics that actually might receive consideration by Leeds? Going in with a rambling diatribe about 4e isn't going to do anything - it's going to result in WotC ignoring anything constructive that may be said and assuming they are dealing with a bunch of angry, irrational fans and that they are justified in ignoring anything critical that might be said.
> 
> ...




I strongly disagree.  Since this is a true case scenario I can think of nothing better than a 3rd edition fan, voicing concerns.

I do not think BASHING 4e is constructive in this case, but it is possible some middle ground can be met with 3rd edition support.  

I don't know what that middle ground is, but I know I feel as many do that WOTC dropped the ball with this game.  Not all the gamers that used to play D&D need an introductory game or wanted to play D&D miniatures.  Maybe WOTC needs to know there is a large community out there that is not in support of their move.


----------



## Sigma (Apr 14, 2009)

Mournblade94 said:


> I strongly disagree.  Since this is a true case scenario I can think of nothing better than a 3rd edition fan, voicing concerns.
> 
> I do not think BASHING 4e is constructive in this case, but it is possible some middle ground can be met with 3rd edition support.
> 
> I don't know what that middle ground is, but I know I feel as many do that WOTC dropped the ball with this game.  Not all the gamers that used to play D&D need an introductory game or wanted to play D&D miniatures.  Maybe WOTC needs to know there is a large community out there that is not in support of their move.




Yeah, I'm sure they're totally unaware of the angry crowd that doesn't like 4e, and talking to one random member of that crowd will somehow convince them of its magnitude and importance.  

It'll be a waste of time to open that can of worms and it won't change a single thing.  Might as well use the opportunity to make a difference, not waste time beating the same dead horse.


----------



## avin (Apr 14, 2009)

4E PR TO OLDER PLAYERS: I think it was poorly sold to old players. Why? Because when my friends and me saw them immediate reaction, even for most of us that are Wow players, was refusal. Mage changes, cartoonish style, art direction and severe lack of fluff create a big refection. But, after tried, all of them liked to play it, even if we are calling it 4E and not D&D. SOLUTION: try again, maybe with a offshot 1 book setting using a more evocative style and fluff (think Planescape, think FRCS 3E), showing more respect to old editions. Not every 4E player is happy with books looking like recipes.

MINIATURES: most of DDM websites are critisyzing (?) the new cartoonish + all primary color of the minis. Get feedback on this, move in the direction of fanbase, don't try to force us to accept things like Dangerous Delve's War Devil. Check Wow boards and watch kids asking all the time for new graphics. Cartoon is wrong for D&D.

PDF: bring it back. At least for older editions. People who play OD&D won't quit it for playing 4E just because PDFs are rare. They will pirate and move on.

DDI: CB is superb. Compendiun is lovely. Now you should integrate Encounter Builder to Compendium in a way we can export the monsters to a table (4x4) in a file and print it.

DUNGEON BUILDER AND TABLETOP ONLINE: forget about. The graphics are already outdated. Sold the rights or make a partnership with a big company such as Blizzard or Bioware. I would only use it if graphics are at least close to NWN2. With the graphics you showed this game is doomed to fail.

And... *BRING MODRONS BACK!*


----------



## sckeener (Apr 14, 2009)

Dear Mr Leeds,


Since WotC has been involved with selling PDFs of older product since the late 90s and file sharing has been around longer, what market forces prompted this abrupt shift in direction?

It has been said that file sharing helps the small or indie companies and hurts the big corporation.  I would like to think my hobby is big time and popular, but since I have trouble finding groups, I doubt it.  Why does WotC think in the long run PDF piracy will hurt the company? 

Since file sharing has been active for years, why the adrupt end to pdfs?  Why not come up with a better digital solution and then faze out PDFs?

how is 4e doing when compared to 3e?  How many 4e core phb books have sold compared to how many sold with the same time frame for 3e?


----------



## Wicht (Apr 14, 2009)

As a lifelong Dungeons and Dragons player, I was dissapointed in the fourth edition of dungeons and dragons because it broke too strongly with the traditions and roots of the game.  I also feel that Wizards of the Coast, the market leader in roleplaying games, views roleplaying games as just another product and fails to appreciate the community spirit that is often enjoyed by both designers and players in the hobby.  I would like the president of Wizards of the Coast to make an effort to move the role-playing game division of his company away from a market oriented approach and back towards the community approach that was utilized by WotC under the OGL.  It is my sincere belief that if he can do this with this one division that the division in question will be more likely to meet the profit goals expected of it.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Apr 14, 2009)

Here you go:
Ones from one who hasn't touched 4E as of yet and didn't go with Pathfinder either.  Who knows if I will do either.

I would like to hear the question answered of how the pulling of PDF's will prevent pirating.  It only takes me a few minutes and Google to find the latest and greatest books already pirated.
4E was leaked prior to release.
With the older out of print books on PDF, you still allowed for a revenue stream to come in from customers like myself who never migrated to newer editions.  If anything it encouraged some of the 'old guard' 1E/2E crowd to try out some of the newer stuff.  Especially when it wasn't overly expensive (same as a physical book).

The court cases are going to turn into WOTC's PR nightmare just like the RIAA had with the music cases.  While I do believe they did right in going after the 'distrubitor' vice the downloader.
That leads to the question of WOTC's current Public Image.  It has been much maligned since the release of 4E in my opinion.  From the forums, to the magazines, to various licences being pulled, to the PDFs, etc. There have been many PR nightmares that have left fans wondering if WOTC is still the company that saved DnD from the dark days of TSR, or if they are turning into their predecessor.
How does WOTC proceed from here?  Is it bringing PDF sales in house?  Are they going to be tied to DDI?

Honestly if the sales are going in house, please say so.  Most will not mind waiting a month for you to set it up.  Though really it should have been ready prior to the pulling the plug.

I guess the only big question I could ask is:
How does WOTC plan to bring me back as a returning customer when the last WOTC DnD Book I bought (new) was a 3.5E book?
While I like the things I've heard on DDI, since I'm not running or playing any 4E games can I actually justify paying a 'monthly' subscription for it?
My suggestion on that is a carrot to the 'old dogs' among us, it doesn't require a lot of active support either.  Slowly (say one man-day a month) add the old editions to the DDI fold of information.  Yes that's a pipe dream, but it shows a way that you can gain revenue from ones such as myself that haven't enriched WOTC's coffers in over a year (with the exception of a box of Miniatures purchased here and there for DnD game use).

Other small ones not as important:
Any plans for one time releases (i.e. one printing) of old edition books/modules?
Any plans for one time releases (unsupported by additional products) of other campaign worlds?  (i.e. Dragonlance / Greyhawk / Darksun / Spelljammer)
Any plans to re-license any of those above worlds?

Tell him thanks for his time and to get a new PR person.


----------



## avin (Apr 14, 2009)

One more thing: *please consider doing CB for OD&D, AD&D and 3.5*. The people playing these editions won't move to 4E but they can add some cash to Wotc by signing DDI for their editions. Don't release all material at once, update monthly adding more material, so you won't have the trouble of a one time signature.

PS. Bring Modrons back \o/


----------



## Ysgarran (Apr 14, 2009)

I'll try to focus in on the core of my dissatisfaction with WotC.

I've always put the story first and the rules second.  For me the rules have only been a set of guidelines, a loose framework if you will, in which the story can move forward with some consistency.  The much stronger framework and one I'm less willing to bend is the story itself.

I've never had a problem in my campaigns dropping a rule-set and moving to a different set of rules.   The characters have always been more than just a set of numbers and abilities.   I could have done the same with moving from 3.5 to 4e.   The friends, enemies, cities, culture, nations, towns, families, etc. of the characters would stay the same even if their abilities were completely re-written.  If I could not convert the characters of the past, then a new generation of characters would take over.  Heck, On a lark I've had the characters create versions of themselves using HeroQuest. 

MHO is that WotC has done just the opposite with their whole approach to marketing 4e.  They seem to have a one rule-set mindset which is antithetical to the way I've always approached D&D (or any RPG for that matter).  My own guess is that I'm no longer the target demographic for this latest incarnation of D&D from WotC.   

Ysgarran.


----------



## Elton Robb (Apr 14, 2009)

I think they should produce 5e. but only after extensive marketing research on what the D&D player *is*, what they want, their current age, what they want out of 5th edition, and what would help them play D&D both on-line and at the table.

I do believe that marketing 4e as they have didn't garner any of the success they've hoped.  I believe they should drop 4e and make Dungeons and Dragons 5th Edition with the Dungeons and Dragons audience in mind.  This isn't about restoring 3e, its about providing a game for people that play Dungeons and Dragons.

4e in my mind is failing.  They jumped the shark by trying to mainstream D&D.  D&D isn't a mainstreamable type of game.  D&D always appealed to a certain hobbyist, and this type of nerd or geek is the one they should appeal too.  The OGL is apart of that marketing, because people who play D&D create for D&D.  And we want to share what we've created.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Apr 14, 2009)

I'm stunned! I thought for sure someone was yanking your chain, Brix.

Could you post the note you sent Hasbro so we can see what prompted Mr. Leeds to respond? I think we could all offer more constructive input if we see what caught Hasbro's and Greg Leed's attention enough to wish to speak directly to you and build from there.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Apr 14, 2009)

Sigma said:


> Yeah, I'm sure they're totally unaware of the angry crowd that doesn't like 4e, and talking to one random member of that crowd will somehow convince them of its magnitude and importance.
> 
> It'll be a waste of time to open that can of worms and it won't change a single thing.  Might as well use the opportunity to make a difference, not waste time beating the same dead horse.




I agree, grousing about 3e/4e is a complete waste of Mr. Leeds' time and of the opportunity given.

WotC could not possibly be more clear than they already have been that they are looking forward with 4e.


----------



## Dannager (Apr 14, 2009)

Criticizing 4th Edition in a discussion you've been offered with Leeds is just about the _worst_ idea I can imagine.  WotC is not going to move away from 4th Edition, and is not going to provide active support for previous editions.  You will be wasting your time - time that could be spent discussing things that may actually prove fruitful.

A good rule of thumb is: only bring up things that WotC could conceivably get behind.  Anything else and you're just wasting your breath.

By the way, Brix, you've taken up the mantle of community representative on this particular occasion.  There is responsibility that comes with that.  If you take the opportunity offered to criticize 4th Edition, you will find many members of the community criticizing _you_ for wasting the chance you were given.


----------



## Wormwood (Apr 14, 2009)

> * 4E




The products have been great and the game is a lot of fun. So stay on course---so far so good!



> * Licence issues (OGL, GSL)




No complaints here, as WotC already supplies so many adventures and supplements that I have no desire to look elsewhere.



> * Setting support




I've never liked design-by-committee, so please don;t allow your fanbase to dictate your design parameters. Generally I think you best serve your customers not by constantly serving up old ideas, but providing excellent new options that they never even knew they wanted. 



> * pdf policy




No complaints.



> * Layoffs of fan favorite designers




Nobody likes layoffs. I have no doubt that he's facing tough decisions, so I won;t second guess them. 



> * Cancellation of print magazines




I use Dragon and Dungeon in their present formats more than I *ever* did when they were dead trees. Keep 'em coming. 



> * D&D Insider




Again, I'm a satisfied subscriber, but new tools and features are always welcome. 

And yeah, I'd love to see *some* form of virtual tabletop in the future.


----------



## Storm Raven (Apr 14, 2009)

Brix said:


> * 4E (WoW-like game not liked by many)




Waste of time to talk about this. i don't like 4e, but WotC isn't going to go back to 3e at this point.



> _Licence issues (OGL, GSL)_




This is one issue that might make some inroads on the 3e/4e debate. The issue here is the "either one edition or the other" poison pill in the GSL. They could (in my opinion) bring back a lot of gamers by getting rid of this and allowing for companies to issue product lines that have both games represented. There will be gamers who will buy products in a single line and might buy from the newer edition as a result.



> _* Setting support (e.g. New Forgotten Realms alienating old fans)_




Probably a waste of time here too. A vocal chunk of setting fans don't want changes to be made, and will complain about them no matter what.



> _* pdf policy_




This should be reversed. The stated reason is as idiotic. All the policy does is cost them those sales they could have gotten in the .pdf market while doing nothing to halt, or even slow down, piracy.



> _* Layoffs of fan favorite designers_




This is an issue that won't go away, and won't be changed. I'd skip it.



> _* Cancellation of print magazines_




Give them an earful on this. By cancelling the print magazines, they lost one of their primary vehicles to hype 4e, and probably cost themselves a chunk of sales. They also lost a way to advertise newer products that isn't tied to their website.



> _* D&D Insider_




Will never replace _Dragon_ or _Dungeon_, and unless they are willing to pour massive amounts of development money into it, it won't ever be the clearinghouse for D&D they think it will.


----------



## Qwillion (Apr 14, 2009)

Questions for Mr. Leeds

How do you plan to bring back in fans that the policies listed  above have alienated?

* 4E (WoW-like game not liked by many)

WotC needs to release a masterpiece adventure product that balances roleplay, combat and puzzles.  (Example Wrath of the River King from a 3PP that has achieved this already).  


* Licence issues (OGL, GSL)
WotC need to unifiy and provide a stamp of approval on those 3PP products that are the best at supporting their product.  This helps both WotC, 3PP, and fans by putting a spotlight on the cream of the crop, the same should be done for fansites.  

Other licenses out there in the real world incorporate good 3PP products into their core products, you need to adopt the same attitude so that there is a unification of design. 

* Setting support (e.g. New Forgotten Realms alienating old fans)
Please make sure that when you assign someone to work on a setting they actually like the setting and don't seek to rewrite it to suit their own personal tastes.  There is a reason it is a setting that has remained in print longer than other settings.  

* pdf policy
Why were older versions of non 4e products pulled?  What was the ratio before that was not alarming?  What is the ration of illegal downloads now that they have been pulled?

Your stance on the magazine vs. your print products is in conflict, might we suggest making dungeon and dragon magazine available for purchase via pdf outside of DDI,

Or a PDF only product line, perhaps "The Best 3PP products of the [insert time frame here] sales of this product would pay for the editor who has to read the submission, and perhaps a entry fee would help support this product as well.   If your the industry leader, you need to take a lead roll in wading through the chaff to show me the diamonds in the rough.

*I will not address the rest my replies will be far too snarky, and I feel those ships have sailed and WotC missed the boat.


----------



## nnms (Apr 14, 2009)

"Tell me about your history with D&D.  What versions have you played?  What was your favorite character?"


----------



## Stoat (Apr 14, 2009)

Two topics to cover:

1) Consider bringing back pdf's from previous editions, especially 1E and 2E.  

2)  WotC seems to have done a poor job communicating with its fans about the pdf issue.  

Be positive.  Complain that you don't like 4E, and he'll write you off.


----------



## Maggan (Apr 14, 2009)

I'd talk a bit about how many fans would like more dialogue with WotC.

I love how Scott Rouse engages with us here at EN World, but he seems like a lone PR vigilante, working with no support from HQ.

So more dialogue, more faces to relate to. D&D is a personal thing for many, and I think people want to attach faces and names to the game.

Also, I'd like WotC to look at the history of the game, and use much of the earlier non-game related IP as building blocks for the future of the game. There's no need to reinvent everything, just work with the wealth of information out there.

But at the same time, I like that WotC is trying out different ways of growing the game, trying out different directions. So another thing I would talk to Mr. Leeds about was that they shouldn't be afraid of trying out new things. Just as long as they are careful not to trample the old things.

/M


----------



## Harr (Apr 14, 2009)

Hate to come off as a downer (although I seem to be doing that more and more lately) But is there anybody, really, who doubts how this phone call is actually going to go?

I mean, come on. Here's the call in a nutshell.



Brix said:


> * 4E (WoW-like game not liked by many)




"We are very happy with how 4th Edition is performing. We have reprinted the 4th Edition Player’s Handbook three times, and PH2 is headed back for it’s second printing already. Ultimately our goal is to keep the hobby industry strong, and our strategy for that is to continue to create great 4th Edition products that will entice our fans to keep playing D&D. In turn, that will grow the hobby industry."



Brix said:


> * Licence issues (OGL, GSL)




"The truth is that the world is changing quickly, and as a business we need to be flexible enough to adapt to that changing environment. We have and always will continue to find the best ways to be responsive to our community of fans and gamers. "



Brix said:


> * Setting support (e.g. New Forgotten Realms alienating old fans)




"The D&D brand is critical to Wizards of the Coast’s success, and decisions such as this are not entered into lightly. We are all very hands-on, and decisions are vetted through all levels of the organization. "



Brix said:


> * pdf policy




"The decision was made for both reasons. The piracy of our products was increasing at an alarming rate, and we felt that it could have a negative impact not only to Wizards of the Coast, but to the hobby industry as a whole. And yes, we can track it."



Brix said:


> * Layoffs of fan favorite designers




"The D&D brand is critical to Wizards of the Coast’s success, and decisions such as this are not entered into lightly. We are all very hands-on, and decisions are vetted through all levels of the organization. "



Brix said:


> * Cancellation of print magazines




"Electronic media will continue to play an even greater role in our D&D business as the months and years go on. Continuing to improve the D&D Insider experience for our customers and fans is one of our top priorities. "



Brix said:


> * D&D Insider




"Continuing to improve the D&D Insider experience for our customers and fans is one of our top priorities. "


Ta-da. Just saved you a phone call


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes (Apr 14, 2009)

*These would be my requests*

Firstly, I would like to thank WoTC for allowing 3rd party retailers to provide another chance for people to download previously purchased PDFs.  I was very angry when I lost the ability to do so and this new opportunity is a good step on the part of WoTC towards regaining my business.   

I own virtually every WoTC hardcover purchased for third edition.  I have a lot of disposable income, I influence the purchases of many other people in my local gaming groups, and I was a very good customer for Wizards of the Coast once.  I would like to be so again, but for that to happen some things need to change.

These are some things WoTC could do that I think would be good for Hasbro and the gaming community.

I would like for WoTC to bring back PDFs for out-of-print WoTC products.  I grew up with a lot of these products and they have a great deal of sentimental value to me.  While I could easily find these on the internet if I chose to, I would like the opportunity to pay Hasbro for my use of them, as I have done in the past.  I don't understand why watermarked PDFs are now out of favor -- it seems to me that you were able to find the uploaders and sue them.  This seems like a positive effect of selling PDFs, not a negative one.  Please don't force me to choose between violating copyrights and being unable to conveniently read products I grew up with as a child.

On the larger subject of 4E, I understand why 4E D&D has changed the way it has, but many of those changes don't meet my needs as a gamer.  I don't really want to start playing D&D in such a radically different fashion than I have done for the last 25 years.  I would like for Wizards to produce a companion volume for 4E that details ways to run a game using 4E in a more traditional, 'old school' manner, and rules changes that make doing so easier.

Lastly, I would like for Wizards of the Coast to work on rebuilding its relationship with the OGL community.  My sincere belief is that moving away from open gaming was a mistake on the part of Hasbro.  I would like for Hasbro to find ways to make 4E more open to participation by 3rd party companies, so that I have a wider availability of product to purchase.


----------



## Dumnbunny (Apr 14, 2009)

Welp, taking it on faith that this conversation is going to do some good:

"You have stated WotC is exploring options for digital distribution of it's content including older editions. Will you commit to including older editions in this new digital distribution format, providing your customers with an alternative to often prohibitively expensive (on non-existant) eBay purchases or ethically objectionable and illegal downloads?

"Will you commit to ensuring that whatever form this new digitial distrubution scheme takes will be portable across different operating systems? Or is locking out non-Windows users on the table?

"Will you commit to ensuring that whatever form this new digitial distrubution scheme takes does not require an active Internet connection to view? Requiring an active Internet connection locks out many uses of the digital product, such as playing at a friends house without a wireless router, a convention, game store or other venue with poor or non-existant wireless, even trying to get some campaign work done on the road at a hotel with an Internet connection too poor to even allow the simplest of web browsing."


----------



## scruffygrognard (Apr 14, 2009)

4th edition doesn't work for me because it represents a major shift in how D&d is marketed, and breaks from the years of tradition that I value.

In AD&D, 2nd Edition AD&D and 3.X, the 3 core books presented the complete rules for the game.  Any other books were optional.

With 4th edition the core rules have been spread out over more and more books.  That makes it seem like a money grab to me.  At the same time, I will not subscribe to a product (the DDI) that follows an MMO model.  Paizo's subscription model (for example) is far superior and, once your subscription ends, you are left with a physical product.

I am worried that your plans for older edition pdfs will be to pull them into the Digital Initiative.  I'd like to have the option of downloading them rather than renting them.


----------



## carmachu (Apr 15, 2009)

If your asking about my dissatisfaction, one of the highest is the GSL debacle, with its delays and then the horrible first draft and ist results. It seemed, the GSL, badly handled.

I have many of Wotc's products and many 3rd party ones, and OGL kept me in the d20 realm. Now with the GSL....most if not all my favorite 3rd PP are moving elsewhere or such....and I've moved with them.


Next question/concern is the DDI, which was hyped alot but....we're coming up on release plus 10 months and it doesnt seem to be anywhere in sight, with what was promised.....


----------



## ExploderWizard (Apr 15, 2009)

OK Harr wins hands down. I would like to compare this proposed call with the actual transcript to see how closely they match.  

Somebody cover me- I can't give XP!!!!


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Apr 15, 2009)

*What I'd do:*

I'd go through this sub-forum.

Tell him the title of the thread, the point of it, and all the salient bits that were brought up (both for WotC and against) and ask him for a reaction.

That'd require a bit of prep-work on your part, but, you'd have a bunch of very salient questions to ask him.


It's almost as though this sub-forum was designed for that very purpose...



But seriously, take a good long look at the angry, the dissenters, the defenders, the lovers, the haters, and so on...and represent them all if you can. Don't limit yourself to this thread; there's a lot going on.

Also, if you feel like a bit more research, check out RPG.net, Necromancer Games, WotC's own forums, and others to get as representative a sample as you like.


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Apr 15, 2009)

EDIT:

Also:

Ask what his thoughts are on the other big names in the industry decrying their decision:

Chris Perkins.
Chris Pramas.
Maybe other guys named Chris.

And so many more...potentially reaching beyond the "important guys named Chris demographic".


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Apr 15, 2009)

Sorry for the multipost. I'm a bit busy tonight, so I hit "submit reply" before my kid messes with the keyboard (age 3.5).


Last, but not least:

Harr is dead on. I can't give XP, but I just tried to, and learnt that I could not. (SO SAD...you deserve it!)



If/when he weasels into corporate-speak, read him Harr's post. Ask him to elaborate beyond what some random guy on a message board predicted he'd say in corporate-speak.

If he hangs up, you've not lost, you've merely gone as far as he was willing to go...nowhere.




LASTLY: any chance for a podcast?


----------



## Jack Colby (Apr 15, 2009)

I'd just like to hear Mr. Leeds tell us some anecdotes about his D&D character.


----------



## William Ronald (Apr 15, 2009)

Many of my questions have been asked, but I will chime in with a few.

"How does WotC plan to attract more people to RPGs? Are there any special products planned or special initiatives with organizations like the RPGA?"

"Will older edition products be available in some electronic form in the near future?"

"All companies need feedback.  What ways does WotC solicit feedback from its customers, and how can we best communicate with you?"

"Some gamers have said that 4E does not meet their needs for roleplaying as well as prior editions.  How would you respond?  Does WotC plan to reach out to that market segment?  How do you address some of the concerns/criticism about 4E?   In retrospect, what do you think you would have done differently in the lead up to the release of 4E?"

"What are some of the ways that WotC plans on supporting the game electronically? Many people now use their lap tops as tools for their gaming sessions? Where do you see WotC going in terms of electronic support for D&D?"

"Are there any plans for an update of D20 Modern?"


----------



## El Mahdi (Apr 15, 2009)

Jack Colby said:


> I'd just like to hear Mr. Leeds tell us some anecdotes about his D&D character.




That's an awesome idea!  Brilliant! 

_(And no cheating Mr. Leeds.  Do not get one of the real gamers in the company to feed you a story.)_



I don't want to add any negativity, especially after the OP specifically asked for positive ideas.

But, I also don't want Mr. Leeds thinking that, true to stereotype, nobody cares about WotC's actions after the nerd rage dies down.



So, I'd like you to tell him I have nothing to ask him, and honestly don't care about anything new he has to say.

He, and WotC have had their opportunity.  In point of fact, multiple opportunities, to both treat their customers as if customers come first, and to set the record straight.  Mr. Leeds chose to waste the opportunity provided by Morrus and PirateCat.

Mr. Leeds, as far as I'm concerned, your _"opportunities"_ are all used up.


----------



## falcarrion (Apr 15, 2009)

What is your plans for the handicap and our troops who depend on pdfs to enjoy the game?


----------



## Dr. Harry (Apr 15, 2009)

Brix said:


> Because
> 
> * pdf policy




  I can see possible reasons for the decision to cease all pdf sales at the same time, but I would ask him to reconsider sales of the 1e/2e material on pdf.  The watermarking technology is clearly good enough to catch copyright infringers, as the current lawsuits illustrate, but I doubt that 1e/2e material represents anything but a way for a trickle of money to continually come in to WotC what what would be zero work at this point.

  Old folks like me want stuff from the past, and new players have "historical documents" to look at to see the past history of their game - and to get ideas, just like me.  This is really my #1, #2, and #3 issue.



> * Cancellation of print magazines





  I hated the loss of the "real" _Dragon_ and _Dungeon[/], but I doubt they're going to change anything at this point.  The logistical costs would be positively staggering, and I can't see them doing that in this market.


  Also, a number of companies have programs like Kenzerco's "adopt-a-soldier" policy where one can donate subscritions to armed forces members serving overseas, especially in war zones.  WotC might consider public donations of DDI access in the same way, or allowing fans to donate these._


----------



## Lanefan (Apr 15, 2009)

nnms beat me to what would have been my first question.

So, a second: 

"Does the removal of the older .pdf's, particularly the 1e-era material, signal a forthcoming WotC release of an "old-school" game system, similar in style to 1e (and a growing host of imitators); as a rules-light alternative to 4e?  In other words, have you any plans to put two quite different editions on the market side by side?"

This might sound like a dumb question on the surface, but if they really are losing market share to all the retro-clones it might not be so far-fetched after all.

Lanefan


----------



## joethelawyer (Apr 15, 2009)

I just have an overall suggestion to follow-up, follow-up, follow-up. Accept no corporate-speak as an answer.  Be very very specific.  

Ans ask his permission to record and post it here.


----------



## pawsplay (Apr 15, 2009)

*Therefore I ask you: "What would you do if you were Greeg Leeds, president of WotC in the current situation?"*

4e - The cycle of new edition, expansion, and eventual collapse has been pretty destructive to the D&D brand. Simply put, it is too expensive to keep revising the game over and over again. There is not a perfect game, and there never will be. With that in mind, I'd suggest looking at things third edition fans might miss about D&D, and see if there is a way to incorporate those things into future supplements, expansions, and options. 

License Issues - With regard to 4e, I am not going to try to tell Hasbro how it's done. But very simply, the GSL needs to be revised to be less one-sided. As it is, WotC is playing the part of a noble benefactor, when in fact third party publishers have sunk a lot of time and money into development. Just as one suggestion, licensees should perhaps be able to continue using any version of the GSL that is less than two years old. It might not also be a bad idea to create a second license, one that has nothing to do with the D&D brand. The GSL is simply not set up to stir innovation; the usefulness of granting permission for people to create variant games is that there is then a permission to revoke if they start misusing trademarks, publishing obscenity, etc. 

The OGL, although it represents the past in terms of WotC's business, is a vitally important link to a big segment of the D&D fan base. Not only should it be tolerated, but as publishers and hobbyists make requests, it might be worthwhile to open up more material. The rationale is very simple; stoke the heat. RPGs are a hobby for creative people, and keeping creative people creating, rather than angry and alienated, is going to help the industry. It does not make sense for WotC to try to continue to develop third edition alongside 4th edition; that would be a waste of resources. But if small publishers want to continue using the OGL to do so, a part of the fanbase will continue to be satisfied and will ultimately help build the D&D brand. 

PDF policy - There is no ending piracy. And in fact, if you took all the money that will be spent in sueing eight people, and simply gave away that much in free PDFs to your fans, you would probably find it more profitable to your bottom line. PDFs have low inventory cost, so they should be an important part of keeping the brand evergreen. Fans who buy only a dozen hardcover books might eventually pick up any number of reasonably priced PDFs, simply because they are there and reasonably priced. Watermarking I view as the best way to fight piracy, because the consequences fall onto one person's reputation. Social disapproval is far more powerful than the law against a nimble adversary such as freeloaders. It is important to realize that the world is changing, and we do not know how this will be handled in the future. It is clear, however, that trying to treat piracy like shoplifting is doomed to failure, aside from the fact that many pirates have little or no ill will or greed. They are simply responding to what is available. 

D&D Insider - Maybe I'm just not the target market, but I always find myself wondering, "Why do people want to pay a subscription for material many other companies would offer for free?" The focus should be on tools and lifestyle enhancements, not content. With content, you are competing, it must be remembered, with a considerable army of fans producing their own material absolutely for free. It should not be assumed that the typical D&D player is going to be a subscriber. Not going to happen. Ultimately, this has turned into a way overpriced fan club.


----------



## Lanefan (Apr 15, 2009)

I came up with something else you can ask him:

"Mr. Leeds, how'd you like to take a little trip to Indianapolis this summer.  There's this convention going on there in August, and I know there'll be a whole lot o' people attending it who'd love to chat with you."

Seriously, if he were to stop by GenCon and hold an open seminar; let us get to know the man behind the words, he could do himself and his company a world o' PR goodness.  'Course, it'd help if he were empowered to give some direct answers to questions on this issue and others, but hey...can't ask for everything. 

Lanefan


----------



## Hairfoot (Apr 15, 2009)

I'd ask him if it was marketing or PR who came up with the idea of talking to a fan as a way of making the company seem less ruthless and self-serving.


----------



## Lanefan (Apr 15, 2009)

pawsplay said:


> 4e - The cycle of new edition, expansion, and eventual collapse has been pretty destructive to the D&D brand. Simply put, it is too expensive to keep revising the game over and over again. There is not a perfect game, and there never will be. With that in mind, I'd suggest looking at things third *(or second, or first)* edition fans might miss about D&D, and see if there is a way to incorporate those things into future supplements, expansions, and options.



Brilliant observation, except for one minor omission I've inserted in bold, above. 

The release-expand-collapse model finished off 2e, clobbered 3e, and it's scary to say that less than a year after release the bloat is already starting to show up in 4e!

There has to be a better way.  I'm just not sure what it is.

Lanefan


----------



## joethelawyer (Apr 15, 2009)

hairfoot said:


> i'd ask him if it was marketing or pr who came up with the idea of talking to a fan as a way of making the company seem less ruthless and self-serving.





lol!


----------



## JRRNeiklot (Apr 15, 2009)

Dannager said:


> By the way, Brix, you've taken up the mantle of community representative on this particular occasion.  There is responsibility that comes with that.  If you take the opportunity offered to criticize 4th Edition, you will find many members of the community criticizing _you_ for wasting the chance you were given.




And he'll find many praising him for it.  Some of us are not happy with 4e at all.  Nothing wrong with adressing the concerns we have with it.


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 15, 2009)

JRRNeiklot said:


> And he'll find many praising him for it.  Some of us are not happy with 4e at all.  Nothing wrong with adressing the concerns we have with it.




Honest question, and I hope I get an honest answer: Do you think WOTC could say anything at this point that would actually address your concerns to the point where you would cease the majority of your negativity towards them?


----------



## Hairfoot (Apr 15, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> Honest question, and I hope I get an honest answer: Do you think WOTC could say anything at this point that would actually address your concerns to the point where you would cease the majority of your negativity towards them?



Good point.  I'd be mollified if they'd just change the name to something more representative, like "Magic: the RPG" or "Hasbro Fantasy Superhero Boardgame" and continue real D&D as a side project.

Ask if he'll do that.


----------



## Mistwell (Apr 15, 2009)

Hairfoot said:


> Good point.  I'd be mollified if they'd just change the name to something more representative, like "Magic: the RPG" or "Hasbro Fantasy Superhero Boardgame" and continue real D&D as a side project.
> 
> Ask if he'll do that.




And if they did that, you would cease the majority of your negativity towards WOTC?


----------



## La Bete (Apr 15, 2009)

Hairfoot said:


> Good point.  I'd be mollified if they'd just change the name to something more representative, like "Magic: the RPG" or "Hasbro Fantasy Superhero Boardgame" and continue real D&D as a side project.
> 
> Ask if he'll do that.




Temp forum, thy purpose revealed.


----------



## Korgoth (Apr 15, 2009)

I would ask him if PDFs of the old school (1E and earlier) products will be made available again. I would also ask about the possibility of a parallel D&D rules set being released that follows the legacy mechanics and premises, rather than the 4E ones (maybe reprinting OD&D or Classic).

I think the old school products are the best things WOTC has going. They should make them available for sale again, if only in electronic form, so that folks can enjoy them.


----------



## Hairfoot (Apr 15, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> And if they did that, you would cease the majority of your negativity towards WOTC?



I genuinely would.  At the moment I feel like a biker who's been primed for the release of a new Harley Davidson line, only to find that all of their bikes will from now on have a silent electric motor, an extra wheel, and a default bright pastel paint scheme with Hello Kitty highlights.

Oh, and the advertising campaign lays claim to the tough, iconic heritage of the new range, as though it's the new and improved generation of a classic brand.


----------



## César Ayala (Apr 15, 2009)

Ask him, if you can and want , what will happen to the dragon and dungeon PDFs. They are going to suffer the same fate that the other pirated pdfs?

Also about the campaign settings, ask him if there's a chance that we can see some more books. Nothing spectacular, 1 book and 1 adventure/year. I like the fact that I won't end flooded in books but having a bit extra of info each year is nice.

Oh, and if at the end of E3 there will be new adventures, starting with a new H1, (h4 perhaps?) and the others.

Scales of War will ever go to old dead tree format? There's a book announced with the best of Dragon, having the Scales of War campaign in paper could be awesome. Well, it'll need 2 or 3 books 

And the most important info: how many 4ed players are needed to change a bulb, compared to the amount of players of 3.x that were needed to change a bulb, how has changed the bulb hobby with the release of 4th and what are they going to do to help the bulbs brick and mortar stores, damaged by the bulb piracy and the Amazon Bulb store.

And to all that 4th bulb edition haters out there: with 4th ed my bulbs shine brighter and me and my bulbers fellows of my bulbing group have tons of fun.


----------



## Quartz (Apr 15, 2009)

Please thank him for taking the time to address these issues with you (and, by extension, us).

One question I have is whether the selling of PDFs was profitable in the first place. There's a significant infrastructure behind the scenes, all of which costs money.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Apr 15, 2009)

In case my request got lost in the shuffle here:

Brix- Could you post the note you sent Hasbro so we can see what prompted Mr. Leeds to respond? I think we could all offer more constructive input if we see what caught Hasbro's and Greg Leed's attention enough to wish to speak directly to you and build from there.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Apr 15, 2009)

La Bete said:


> Temp forum, thy purpose revealed.




This forum needs padded walls.


----------



## Korgoth (Apr 15, 2009)

Wulf Ratbane said:


> This forum needs padded walls.




Why, do they keep out threadcrappers and trolls?


----------



## Plane Sailing (Apr 15, 2009)

Should we close the thread, or will people stop taking cheap shots at one another?

No further warnings in this thread. Behave or it gets closed, and the one causing the closure is likely to get a short suspension.


----------



## Cadfan (Apr 15, 2009)

Edited by admin. You make a post that ignores admin instructions, _right after_ the admin told you not to? I give you points for chutzpah, which you can spend on a different thread.


----------



## Mournblade94 (Apr 15, 2009)

William Ronald said:


> "Some gamers have said that 4E does not meet their needs for roleplaying as well as prior editions. How would you respond? Does WotC plan to reach out to that market segment? How do you address some of the concerns/criticism about 4E? In retrospect, what do you think you would have done differently in the lead up to the release of 4E?"




This above all is what I would like to have discussed.  It is entirely possible to discuss this with WOTC without propagating negativity, especially if you use the tone in the above example.


----------



## Mournblade94 (Apr 15, 2009)

Hairfoot said:


> I genuinely would. At the moment I feel like a biker who's been primed for the release of a new Harley Davidson line, only to find that all of their bikes will from now on have a silent electric motor, an extra wheel, and a default bright pastel paint scheme with Hello Kitty highlights.
> 
> Oh, and the advertising campaign lays claim to the tough, iconic heritage of the new range, as though it's the new and improved generation of a classic brand.




I would of given you experience for this one as well...

Great analogy!


----------



## Voadam (Apr 15, 2009)

A reminder of what Brix is not looking for and is looking for



Brix said:


> _When I have the opportunity to talk to the president of WotC *I will not use the time to complain more about the situation*, but to present ideas what WotC could do to make us 3E people happy again.
> 
> *Therefore I ask you: "What would you do if you were Greeg Leeds, president of WotC in the current situation?"*
> 
> ...



_

So as a 3e person what positive ideas do you have for WotC to do._


----------



## Voadam (Apr 15, 2009)

I have another suggestion for Leeds.

Release more of the old 3e stuff under the OGL. This would allow small publishers to develop stuff from them. I would love to see pdfs of 3e warlock class books. I would like to see Book of 9 swords, Tome of Magic, and Magic of Incarnum things. I would love to see Fiend Folio, MMII-V, Monsters of Faerun, and Fiendish Codexes released as OGC and available for use on d20 srd.org the way I use MM monster stat information from there.

As a 3e player and DM this would make me very happy.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 15, 2009)

Voadam said:


> I have another suggestion for Leeds.
> 
> Release more of the old 3e stuff under the OGL. This would allow small publishers to develop stuff from them. I would love to see pdfs of 3e warlock class books. I would like to see Book of 9 swords, Tome of Magic, and Magic of Incarnum things. I would love to see Fiend Folio, MMII-V, Monsters of Faerun, and Fiendish Codexes released as OGC and available for use on d20 srd.org the way I use MM monster stat information from there.
> 
> As a 3e player and DM this would make me very happy.




This will absolutely never happen. How I wish it would...but it won't.


----------



## Voadam (Apr 15, 2009)

Alzrius said:


> This will absolutely never happen. How I wish it would...but it won't.




I believe you are right, but the question was to present ideas of "what WotC could do to make us 3E people happy again."

Being magnaminous and releasing old edition stuff they are no longer using as OGC would make me happy. As would their selling cheap old edition (including 3e) pdfs. The former would be a gift to 3e and those who profit from 3e (which unfortunately is no longer WotC with the suspension of 3e pdfs). The latter would, I believe, benefit WotC directly.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Apr 15, 2009)

Okay, here's my question:

Why are you addressing us with all that evasive business-speak in the ENWorld interview?  You had to have known that kind of language is transparently cagey, and that we'd be disappointed and aggrieved by your responses.  I hope you don't think we're idiots, and so I want to know what that was all about.  

The consensus around here is that the interview told us almost nothing, and did little to help us to understand the situation.  In fact, it seemed as though you had a script of pre-prepared answers which you were selecting in order to respond to questions you hadn't yet seen.  Will you not deal plainly with us, your paying customers (and in some cases, shareholders), concerning the company's decisions and direction?

Previously, we have been provided with company information by people like Scott Rouse, whom the community perceives to be someone who speaks to us as interested parties who have legitimate concerns with respect to the D&D game.  Scott treats us like human beings, and most of us appreciate that.  Why have you decided to deviate from that strategy?


----------



## concerro (Apr 16, 2009)

I would like for the pdfs of the earlier editions to be open for sale again. Those that are going to buy them will buy them, and those that won't, can't be stopped from obtaining them because they are already released. Anything a person believes to be worth buying will be bought. If you(WoTC) decide to cancel anything again try to handle it the way goodman games did. People will still be unhappy, but you will have less unhappy people. If you are not selling whatever you are cancelling through a 3rd party(you are selling it yourselves) then at least 2 weeks notification will still be nice.


----------



## Aberzanzorax (Apr 16, 2009)

I think a great beginning question would be:

"So! Why are you here?"


If given business-speak:


Followup:

"No, really. Why are you here?"


----------



## Jack Colby (Apr 16, 2009)

Voadam said:


> I have another suggestion for Leeds.
> 
> Release more of the old 3e stuff under the OGL. This would allow small publishers to develop stuff from them. I would love to see pdfs of 3e warlock class books. I would like to see Book of 9 swords, Tome of Magic, and Magic of Incarnum things. I would love to see Fiend Folio, MMII-V, Monsters of Faerun, and Fiendish Codexes released as OGC and available for use on d20 srd.org the way I use MM monster stat information from there.
> 
> As a 3e player and DM this would make me very happy.




I'd second this, but add every previous edition, not just 3E.  Speaking of which, why are the questions/suggestions of this thread meant to only be "from fans of 3E" and not "from fans of earlier editions"?


----------



## Harlekin (Apr 16, 2009)

Aberzanzorax said:


> I think a great beginning question would be:
> 
> "So! Why are you here?"
> 
> ...




I'ld think if you are too antagonistic, this is going to be a short conversation. And Greg Leeds will get the impression that reaching out to disgruntled ex fans is pointless.


----------



## Mournblade94 (Apr 16, 2009)

Jack Colby said:


> I'd second this, but add every previous edition, not just 3E. Speaking of which, why are the questions/suggestions of this thread meant to only be "from fans of 3E" and not "from fans of earlier editions"?



 I agree.

I have switched entuusiastically to every edition of D&D, as it evolved.  After I played the new editions and learned them I loved them.  I had the same attitude with 4e, until I learned the system.

Bethesda still makes money off of Morrowind.


----------



## scruffygrognard (Apr 16, 2009)

If WotC is worried about piracy, could they at least re-release previous edition books and modules through Lulu?

The books would be more expensive BUT it would cost WotC next to nothing and I'm sure there would be people out there who would jump at the chance to buy those books (again).

Green Ronin is doing this with their 3rd Era line and I applaud them for it.


----------



## xechnao (Apr 16, 2009)

cperkins said:


> If WotC is worried about piracy, could they at least re-release previous edition books and modules through Lulu?
> 
> The books would be more expensive BUT it would cost WotC next to nothing and I'm sure there would be people out there who would jump at the chance to buy those books (again).
> 
> Green Ronin is doing this with their 3rd Era line and I applaud them for it.




I second this. To ask Wotc this lulu POD service question seems a very good idea. In fact this question seems so good that I think it deserves more forwarding. I am forking this.


----------



## Starbuck_II (Apr 16, 2009)

Voadam said:


> I have another suggestion for Leeds.
> 
> Release more of the old 3e stuff under the OGL. This would allow small publishers to develop stuff from them. I would love to see pdfs of 3e warlock class books. I would like to see Book of 9 swords, Tome of Magic, and Magic of Incarnum things. I would love to see Fiend Folio, MMII-V, Monsters of Faerun, and Fiendish Codexes released as OGC and available for use on d20 srd.org the way I use MM monster stat information from there.
> 
> As a 3e player and DM this would make me very happy.




Yes, adding at least some things as SRD from those books would be awesome.

Just like the DMG/MM/etc (not everything is in from those books SRD): you can keep some things just in the books, but release the rest ofthe parts.

That would lower Pirating. Heck, even though 90% of Expanded Psionic Handbook is in the SRD: people that like Psionics still bought the book because we like having actual things to hold and read.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Apr 17, 2009)

My suggestions for Mr. Leeds?

#1: *Make the DDI like unto a God*. Put older editions in the compendium. Older rules references. Older books we can read _right on the site_. Who the heck wouldn't pay $10/month to be able to search every word of text ever printed in a D&D rulebook? To be able to roll on 1e tables right there? To search for "The Escathon, Planescape" and get everything that mentions them. 

Mr. Leeds: People would give you piles of money to do this. Do this. Make piles of money doing it. Laugh all the way to the bank and the next shareholder's meeting, and give them all the bird, because they will crown you king of the money pile when you unite some millions of D&D fans under a single roof that channels part of their paychecks to you every month. Every D&D player with a computer will be visiting your website and giving you money. 

#2: *Stop Being Scared of Pirates*. Grow a pair. Absolutely seriously. The pirates can't kill you. D&D (and books in general) aren't the music industry. No one cares if the PHBII shows up on torrent sites a week after it's released. You're never going to get cheapskates and scofflaws to pay. These aren't lost sales, they're more like market data, showing you what people in general are interested in. Most people -- most consumers -- want to give you money for awesome stuff. Let them. Make it easy for them. Let them do whatever they want with what they buy. 

#3: *Sell A Friggin' T-Shirt Or Something*. The D&D brand is much stronger than just the books. Why can't I buy a "Jesus Saves (and takes half damage)" shirt at the WotC store? Why can't I walk around with the D&D logo emblazoned on my boxer shorts? Why can't I buy a print of some D&D artwork and slap it in a frame and stick it up on my wall? Even if I friggin' hate a given edition, I might be all "OMG SEXY ELF POSTER" and get it anyway. If WEBCOMIC ARTISTS can do this, why cant you? Bonus point: this stuff has a huge profit margin, and isn't easily pirate-able, so FRIGGIN DO IT. 

#4: *Start selling PDFs again, and don't charge more than $10 for them*. Remind the brick-and-mortar folks that PDF's aren't books, and that you're giving them shirts and posters and Designer-hosted gamedays or whatever, so they can shove a dice bag in it. It's not your job to keep them in business, it's your job to sell D&D. You do this by selling PDF, 'cuz some folks just won't do it in other ways. And you sell them not for the same price as a hardcover book, because people aren't idiots. For bonus points, this means you'll get a lot of people buying the same book twice, and only grousing about it mildly. "grumble grumble don't wanna will do so anyway" kind of stuff. If they don't want to buy it twice, they don't have to -- they'll find ways around it, and you can let them. A $10 convenience isn't a big deal for most folks. 

#5: *Embrace Open Gaming*. WotC _invented_ that junk, and it rocks. The GSL makes everyone's mouths taste like doodie. Friggin' go OGL already. You don't need to put everything online for free like 3e did, because you don't need an SRD: just designate some of your rules content as open. That's all. Lead the industry again, man!

#6: *Gaming Groups are your Recruitment Tool*. People get into D&D by joining existing groups, by and large. By meeting folks who already play and thinking it might be kind of neat. Make this easy. I don't know exactly how you go about that, but if you're going to grow your player base, you must do this. Free Idea: link it to the gaming stores, who will then sex you up for giving them fresh customer meat in their physical store. 

I am not very diplomatic, so I assume you can put these in less abrasive terms. This is why I am a dude on the message boards and not a CEO. All of these are things the CEO of WotC should be taking into account. 

I should also say the Print-On-Demand idea is pretty ding dang good. 

Friggin' awesome that you got to do this. Lucky it wound up you and not me.


----------



## Halivar (Apr 17, 2009)

KM is absolutely, positively, 100%-without-any-margin-of-error, tautologically, objectively (and possibly even presciently and prophetically) correct in the above post. It is truth as should be set in stone tablets, and then beaten over WotC's heads.


----------



## Stoat (Apr 17, 2009)

I second everything Havilar said.  Translate KM's abrasive language into happy elf-talk and put it forward.


----------



## concerro (Apr 17, 2009)

*I realized it is not as easily to find the old 3.x articles such as "Rules of the Game" on the website. I understand 4E is where its at, but if there were a link to a 3.x page with all of the old stuff that would be nice. Since the information is only being moved, and no new content is being created it should not take more than a few months to create this new page. You put a link to this new page in the lower left hand corner of the 4E main page so it does not distract anyone or you could have it as its own page. I just get tired of having to use google to find stuff. I know the site has a search bar, but it does not work as well as google does.* If you are short on web designers give the job to one of the board members. I am sure there is at least one guy that can do html pretty well. I would do it but my skills are about a five on a scale of 1 to 10 when it comes to web design. 

The part I want really want Greg to get is bolded. The rest is just me talking to much


----------



## am181d (Apr 17, 2009)

A good line of question might be this: 

"I understand why you might want to stop releasing new PDFs, as this would at least slow the creation of illegal torrents, but what was the purpose behind taking down older PDFs which are already available on the torrent sites?"

If you get an answer like, "Well, we're rethinking our whole strategy from the top down," you can follow up with: "But, in the meantime, why was it necessary to cut off access to older PDFs? Are you at all concerned that you're cutting off a potential revenue stream?" 

And: "Do you worry that the decisions you're making now (to eliminate a legal channel for purchasing PDFs) may actually increase piracy, both in the short and long term?"


----------



## Hairfoot (Apr 17, 2009)

I endorse Stoat, seconding Havilar, supporting Kamikaze Midget.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 17, 2009)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> My suggestions for Mr. Leeds?
> 
> #1: *Make the DDI like unto a God*. Put older editions in the compendium. Older rules references. Older books we can read _right on the site_. Who the heck wouldn't pay $10/month to be able to search every word of text ever printed in a D&D rulebook? To be able to roll on 1e tables right there? To search for "The Escathon, Planescape" and get everything that mentions them.
> 
> ...




I fully endorse this.


----------



## njorgard (Apr 17, 2009)

*Truer words...*



Kamikaze Midget said:


> My suggestions for Mr. Leeds?
> 
> #1: *Make the DDI like unto a God*. Put older editions in the compendium. Older rules references. Older books we can read _right on the site_. Who the heck wouldn't pay $10/month to be able to search every word of text ever printed in a D&D rulebook? To be able to roll on 1e tables right there? To search for "The Escathon, Planescape" and get everything that mentions them.
> 
> ...




This post by KM echoes my sentiments exactly...

KM: You say you are not a diplomat, but you sure know how to make a point!


----------



## Halivar (Apr 17, 2009)

njorgard said:


> This post by KM echoes my sentiments exactly...
> 
> KM: You say you are not a diplomat, but you sure know how to make a point!



When he says things like "Make DDI like unto a god," he wins my heart.


----------



## thedungeondelver (Apr 17, 2009)

I don't agree with KM.

I will not, and I will not _advocate_, having to pay month-to-month to use old *D&D* products, whether it's the last 3.5 book released a year and change ago or whether it's a copy of *CHAINMAIL*.

Not no, but hell no.

Sell them via print-on-demand, or find another way to sell PDFs, or don't do it at all.

Right up until someone came up with the cockamamie "DDI" the money folks spent on RPGs was, in itself "evergreen".  I might have $1500 worth of Dwarven Forge on the shelf behind me but unlike $1500 worth of (bad) movies (for example) I get my value from it again and again.  Likewise my *D&D* books (and all the other RPGs).

Dipping into my wallet every month and asking me to pay for the privledge?  Uh, no thanks.  *D&D* isn't cable service, it isn't a magazine, or a newspaper.  Hell it's not even *NETFLIX*.  If the argument is "yes but these are electronic versions and are therefore software and we need a new model" then throw out the idea of them being electronic.  Print-on-demand and let me, the consumer, and a $25 flatbed scanner sort out the difficulties of getting it on the computer.


----------



## Halivar (Apr 17, 2009)

I think it's a little late to put the cat back in the bag, tdd. The fact is that the DDI model is successful for WotC because so many of us approve of it with our monthly subscription $$. Hoping that they'll suddenly drop that model for another, less profitable one, is purely wishful thinking. It won't happen.

EDIT: What I would kill for is access to all previously published adventures. Some of those are treasure troves, and are hard to get a hold of.


----------



## Grazzt (Apr 17, 2009)

Jack99 said:


> I fully endorse this.




I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products.  PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.


----------



## Festivus (Apr 17, 2009)

Halivar said:


> I think it's a little late to put the cat back in the bag, tdd. The fact is that the DDI model is successful for WotC because so many of us approve of it with our monthly subscription $$. Hoping that they'll suddenly drop that model for another, less profitable one, is purely wishful thinking. It won't happen.
> 
> EDIT: What I would kill for is access to all previously published adventures. Some of those are treasure troves, and are hard to get a hold of.




Bear in mind that it's a fine line between $5 for Dungeon, Dragon and the CB and $15/$20 for all content.  I would cease my subscription at that point because I don't really play older editions (except 3.5, and I have the books for those).  I like the proposed PoD idea, it would allow me to order some of the older modules that I might want to read for nostalgia sake, but I don't want to pay a higher fee every month to be able to do so.


----------



## crazy_cat (Apr 17, 2009)

Grazzt said:


> I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products.  PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.



This. 

I want to own my RPG materials (PDF, or preferrably dead tree) not rent them.


----------



## Henry (Apr 17, 2009)

crazy_cat said:


> This.
> 
> I want to own my RPG materials (PDF, or preferrably dead tree) not rent them.




Only one thing: Those products already exist, and there will never again be new product for those game systems from the D&D brand name holder. (Possible, but not very probable.). So by driving people to a subscription, it's promoting D&D, from the new to the old and everything in between, making it possible to keep producing and bringing in new blood. As it stands, there's NOTHING for pre-3E except the pirate stuff. It may not be the best model, but it's not a bad one, either.

I will say one thing, brought up by Ron Blessing and Sean Patrick Fannon on The Game's the Thing Podcast: PDFs aren't lost sales, and they aren't an alternative release channel - they're a value added service moreseo than anything else, and despite what companies want to treat them as. According to Mr. Fannon, One Book Shelf posted record sales in Q1 2009 and OBS plans to offer something new in their business model "based on their research that there is a large section of gamers who prefer both the Print and PDF product simultaneously" (paraphrasing him).

If WotC had stuck with the plan to offer free or cheap PDFs with their paper product, I believe they'd have been praised to the skies for it, and likely sold even more books than they did. I just don't see offering yet another little-used format like kindle or e-reader and tracking every person opening their PDF via DRM in Orwellian fashion as a strong business plan.


----------



## Dumnbunny (Apr 17, 2009)

Grazzt said:


> I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products.  PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.



This.

I expect to keep playing older editions (OD&D, BD&D, 1e) for the next 30+ years, and paying $120 or whatever it is per year just for access to the books I'd be looking for is simply not reasonable. If they did come out with something like that, I'd sign up and then format-shift the content I'm looking for into a portable format, such as a PDF.


----------



## joethelawyer (Apr 17, 2009)

Grazzt said:


> I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products.  PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.




Ditto


----------



## TwinBahamut (Apr 17, 2009)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> #1: *Make the DDI like unto a God*.



I'll agree with this.




> #2: *Stop Being Scared of Pirates*.



I don't think that WotC should be afraid of pirates, but I do think that chasing after pirates is a good thing. Just ignoring the pirates and condoning their actions as a result doesn't help anybody but thieves and scum.




> #3: *Sell A Friggin' T-Shirt Or Something*.



Not a bad idea.




> #4: *Start selling PDFs again, and don't charge more than $10 for them*.



I think he would be better off just listening to your first idea.




> #5: *Embrace Open Gaming*.



I couldn't care less about open gaming. Cooperating with publishers so they can use the DDI to provide greater support for GSL products seems like a better idea to me.




> #6: *Gaming Groups are your Recruitment Tool*.



I'm really not sure if there is any way for WotC to do this. It isn't the way I got into the hobby (I was lured in by raw D&D brand recognition), so I can't think of what they could do. I think simply stepping up in marketing might work better for them.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Apr 18, 2009)

Graz'zt said:
			
		

> I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products. PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.




It's a good thing I also say things like "Sell cheap PDFs, don't be scared of pirates, and Print On Demand is a good idea."  I wouldn't use the DDI as a cure-all, but the convenience and speed of it could be useful even for people who own PDFs or Lulu versions of the older books. It's not THE answer, but it's one prong of the answer. It's how you make it easy for people who want your stuff to give you money to use it. 

Because if you do that, you can worry less and less about pirates.



> I don't think that WotC should be afraid of pirates, but I do think that chasing after pirates is a good thing. Just ignoring the pirates and condoning their actions as a result doesn't help anybody but thieves and scum.




In any enterprise when you make things people want, you will be competing against people who make knock-offs. Store-brand groceries. Cereals in bags. Chinatown Coach bags. Digital piracy. Basic theft. It's going to happen, and you can't stop it. You can't use these as excuses to stop letting people give you money for things. You can certainly use it as an excuse to make the paper version better, or to make the rules able to be accessed in multiple places for a small fee, but if you just retreat into your shell, you're just shooting yourself in the foot over something that you can't stop. You can't achieve security; don't go crazy trying to. Put in place basic precautions, but the best way to fight piracy is to give people what they want at a reasonable price. Check out Hulu. It's the TV industry's best answer to torrent sites because it's just like watching TV, only BETTER. It's more convenient to watch a show on Hulu, most of the time, than it is to go download it....and cheaper than cable. 

I'll tell ya this: selling PDFs for $30 was NOT more convenient than downloading the book. 



			
				TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> I think he would be better off just listening to your first idea.




I don't think the first idea is a panacea. It's part of the solution but, as others pointed out, it can't be the entire solution. People generally want to give you money in a lot of different ways. Leeds just needs to set up the buckets to catch it (rather than taking the bucket away because someone might be catching some overflow). 



> I couldn't care less about open gaming. Cooperating with publishers so they can use the DDI to provide greater support for GSL products seems like a better idea to me.




The GSL -- even revised -- is borked. It accomplishes WotC's goals, but those goals are borked. They are too freaked out over brand identity. It is a game that is shamelessly based on public domain (and, in the case of Tolkein, sometimes not-so-public-domain) works and modularity (every DM has their own version of the game). Why work against that? All that does is put up walls where there shouldn't be walls.

It doesn't matter if YOU don't care about open gaming. This is another channel of money that WotC can get to flow into itself. More people in the hobby = more people playing D&D (even if they start off with some 4e of a different flavor). Wizards needs to care about open gaming.



> I'm really not sure if there is any way for WotC to do this. It isn't the way I got into the hobby (I was lured in by raw D&D brand recognition), so I can't think of what they could do. I think simply stepping up in marketing might work better for them.




Brand recognition doesn't get six adults to sit in a room for four hours a week pretending to be an elf. You can't focus on individuals -- you need to focus on groups, because an individual can't play D&D by himself. Again, this is good to do through local gaming stores, and it's something that's basically impossible through the big-box retailers, so if WotC is serious about supporting the FLGSes, this would be a golden way to do it. Real, flesh-and-blood social networking.


----------



## M.L. Martin (Apr 18, 2009)

Kamikaze Midget said:


> It is a game that is shamelessly based on . . . modularity (every DM has their own version of the game).




  Stray hypothesis: There is a recurrent trend among the Keepers of the Game (some of Gygax's articles at the launch of AD&D, some of the feel I was getting off of Dancey and others when 3E launched) that considers this to be a bug, not a feature.


----------



## Emryys (Apr 18, 2009)

Grazzt said:


> I mostly endorse it. Everything but #1. No way in Hell would I pay a monthly fee for access to older D&D products.  PoD sure. PDF sales, sure. DDI subscription to access 'em...nope.




Why not do both... 
It seems there would be damand for the older products in PoD/Deadtree and having them in the compendium might expose folks to all that is D&D. Not sure how much of a crossover there is, but some might even get both. At ~$10 a month, the conveinience  for running games might be worth it. I buy the books for 4E and have a sub. Might work for other editions too... love to have that for 1E 

For the current edition, have all the gamestore/RPGA game group support...


----------



## njorgard (Apr 18, 2009)

So when is this call with Greg leeds anyways?


----------



## Shazman (Apr 18, 2009)

DaveMage said:


> As a 3.5 fan, I think the WotC/4E ship has sailed.
> 
> I really don't have anything I'd want to say to or ask Greg Leeds at this point.
> 
> It's time to move on.




I'm with Dave on this.  At this point, there is no way they are going to do anything to make 4th edition more like the game we have enjoyed in the past, bring back the print magazines, or allow their pdfs to be sold again.  In short, they have gone too far to do anything to bring us former WotC customers back.  That ship has definitely sailed.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 18, 2009)

Subscriptions services can and do make sense regarding some goods.  When you think about it, a flat fee to access everything (with the risk it could go away) might be better than a permanent investment.

For instance, O'Reilly Media offers Safari subscription for their vast library, and in many cases, music subscription services might be better for some than trying to buy individual CDs.

This might not work for RPGs, since the hobby is a collectors.  (It makes more sense for Safari because computer knowledge changes all the time and I have doubts a 20 year old book on an edition of an older program or language no longer in active use makes much sense.)   But some people may just want to read and then walk away--in today's day and age, people don't always want to resell--why do you see so many products with "free" signs left on the curb.  I could see this having some value.



> You can't use these as excuses to stop letting people give you money for things.




Depends on how much your making.  Some business may go under--sometimes it's not worth the fight.  That's for the company to decide.  My Dad had a business, but he ended up going back to work for other people--reason, accounts receivables--to hard to get people to pay you what they owe.  I have a feeling if piracy is too rampant, some companies will go out of business or evolve into something where piracy won't be as much of an issue.



> Sell A Friggin' T-Shirt Or Something.




T-Shirt revenue is widely bantered on by the people complaining about the music industry "whining" about piracy.  T-Shirt sales are not that lucrative.  And merchandising is an ancillary market compared to the primary.  I want to buy books and supplements, not T-Shirts, stickers, logos, etc.  The ancillary merchandise pales compared to what I want.  



> The GSL -- even revised -- is borked. It accomplishes WotC's goals, but those goals are borked. They are too freaked out over brand identity. It is a game that is shamelessly based on public domain (and, in the case of Tolkein, sometimes not-so-public-domain) works and modularity (every DM has their own version of the game). Why work against that? All that does is put up walls where there shouldn't be walls.




Which is why they've also made the radical changes they did.  (I don't particularly like those changes, but I understand them) Brand Identity is the only way for a strong product to stay strong.  The novels, original creations, etc., are important.  D&D is not meant to be "Generic Fantasy RPG".  Public domain stuff is only part of the process.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 18, 2009)

Shazman said:


> I'm with Dave on this.  At this point, there is no way they are going to do anything to make 4th edition more like the game we have enjoyed in the past, bring back the print magazines, or allow their pdfs to be sold again.  In short, they have gone too far to do anything to bring us former WotC customers back.  That ship has definitely sailed.




I agree with selling older versions.  Hell, at least release some of the 2e and lower classics, the rareities.

OTOH, Wizards sort of stopped this a long time ago.  They stopped scanning old products years ago.  (I've always wanted Epic of Aerth, Gary's world setting for Dangerous Journeys, to be available via PDF, like Mythus was) So I suspected they don't want to go through this process again.


----------



## AllisterH (Apr 18, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> Which is why they've also made the radical changes they did.  (I don't particularly like those changes, but I understand them) Brand Identity is the only way for a strong product to stay strong.  The novels, original creations, etc., are important.  D&D is not meant to be "Generic Fantasy RPG".  Public domain stuff is only part of the process.




It's similar to the reason why Bioware has its own sci-fi and now classic fantasy RPG universes (MASS EFFECT & DRAGON AGE)

It's all about the branding and the trademarks.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 18, 2009)

Also keep in mind the "public domain" stuff only makes up part of the experience.  While some things were taken from novels, they were either sufficiently changed enough so they weren't plagiarism, removed, or even in a few rare cases given oral permission (Ioun stones).

A lot of stuff is D&D exclusive.  Modrons, the culture of the Drow (if not the name), Kender, Beholders, Mind Flayers, Githyanki, stuff like Ultradaemons, etc.  Plus the various campaign settings etc.

I know in the old days it was fast and loose, we had Giants In the Earth, April Fool's day jokes featuring Bugs Bunny and Donald Duck, etc.  As soon as D&D became a big enterprise with LJN figures, the Cartoon, and Novels, all that had to change.


----------



## pawsplay (Apr 18, 2009)

JohnRTroy said:


> A lot of stuff is D&D exclusive.  Modrons, the culture of the Drow (if not the name), Kender, Beholders, Mind Flayers, Githyanki, stuff like Ultradaemons, etc.  Plus the various campaign settings etc.




The term Githyanki comes from a George RR Martin novel, and the githyanki/illithid relationship from a Niven novel. The culture of the Drow is Melnibone, plus a spider motif. Mind flayers were inspired by the cover of a Brian Lumley novel. Modrons are kind of unique, but definitely draw on Flatland, and remind me a lot of the beings in The Mote In God's Eye, who are also caste-driven.

Kender are a Dragonlance-specific phenomenon.

I'll give you the beholder.


----------



## avin (Apr 20, 2009)

Niven is the guy who wrote Ringworld, is that what inspired Sigil?


----------



## fireinthedust (Apr 20, 2009)

My two cents:


1)   Big fan of 4e (huge!), as it's playable by my group, and allows the DM to have a life.   I've managed to get a Classic feel to my games with it.  I like the PH2, Martial Power, and am looking forward to other books.  This is, for me, the best edition I've seen.  R&D did a great job.  Keep this edition going, please.

2)   I really like DDI, and more options there would be nice.  A Module Formatting tool, to take encounters and monsters I make or get from the compendium, and make a file out of them, is I think the direction I'd like to see.
     Online tools and PDFs are key.  I do like (love) print books, but can't always carry them with me.

3)   I don't like the flippant management of company-public relations.  The PDF debacle was rude.  The way Paizo was "just fired" was rude, or it seemed to me that way.  The hard magazines were a tradition, not just a product.  That DDI is a great product has no bearing on this.  Saying goodbye to Dragon and Dungeon on a whim, as if the public's opinion didn't matter, that was a bad move... I mean, why is Paizo the competition now?  That one stupid move.
      We want to love you guys.  Please help us feel like necessary decisions (like "we can't afford the magazine in paper and it kills trees") can be done.  Let us feel that we're not "beneath your respect" with these moves.  Try to accomodate us, we're paying for stuff.  It's not the same as a TV network: the community is all about interaction; manners will help so many of the recent problems.

4)  GSL/OGL/Fansites and participation:   Figure a way to get the players interested in the game, that's the DMs job, that's what you're selling.  Now expand that.  Not just RPGA.  We tend to be counter-cultural.  Suspicious of ...well, name it.  That's why we create an interior world.    
     Your job is to nurture the market, and that means the community.  I like 4e.   Now let me write for you.  Let me post my adventures.  I get the quality control, perhaps, and other companies have had it (M&M does it for their brand).
      I get the market share, but this product isn't like other products.  It's an amazing one, but it's all about people.  Why would you alienate your stockholders?  Why would you alienate your co-workers?  
      Granted, I didn't like all the OGL stuff that came out.  Also, a lot of cool monsters weren't in it, and that sucks.  I want to do a 4e campaign setting some day, but what if I can't use Genasi or Drow?  

suggestions:

1)  access to a shared history isn't bad; don't lose your own foundation, right?
2)  more DDI tools; I'm subscribed, beef it up!
3)  I like the design changes, but sneaking them in isn't necessary.
4)  More stuff in the GSL, like if I want to write a setting with my own version of Illithids and Beholders;  Or if I want to publish a set of D&D 4e inspired novels!


----------



## concerro (Apr 21, 2009)

I don't play 4th but I would like for you(WotC) to start putting indexes in the books so that when 5th comes out the habit is already in place. Not having indexes for all the 3rd edition books was annoying.


----------



## Starbuck_II (Apr 25, 2009)

fireinthedust said:


> I mean, why is Paizo the competition now? That one stupid move.
> We want to love you guys. Please help us feel like necessary decisions (like "we can't afford the magazine in paper and it kills trees") can be done. Let us feel that we're not "beneath your respect" with these moves. Try to accomodate us, we're paying for stuff. It's not the same as a TV network: the community is all about interaction; manners will help so many of the recent problems.



 They aren't competition: but internet people like to make stands in the sand and create artificial enemies.

It creates a cohesion of us vs them. 

WotC explicitly said they have no problems with Paizo's pathfinder.


----------



## Festivus (Apr 26, 2009)

concerro said:


> I don't play 4th but I would like for you(WotC) to start putting indexes in the books so that when 5th comes out the habit is already in place. Not having indexes for all the 3rd edition books was annoying.




My 4E PHB has an index... and I almost never use it since everything is organized into a few select pages that I have ever needed to look anything up (page 277 anyone?)

My 4E DMG has an index... the only other book where I might need to go look something up.

Everything else I don't really understand the need for an index (as far as my 4E books go).  Things are organized either by class or alphabetically.  I don't really need indexes when it's organized like that.  I really don't have much trouble looking anything up I need.


----------



## Harr (Apr 26, 2009)

Starbuck_II said:


> They aren't competition: but internet people like to make stands in the sand and create artificial enemies.
> 
> It creates a cohesion of us vs them.
> 
> WotC explicitly said they have no problems with Paizo's pathfinder.




Ha, you really think that what determines whether something is competition or not is one side "explicitly saying" that they have a problem with the other side?? Funny...

It doesn't matter if the WotC staff and the Paizo staff have daily group hugs, picnics in the sunshine every weekend and give each other "cause it's Monday" gifts... WotC made Paizo into competition, and they are both in fact now competition to each other. Whether one has an explicit problem with the other has nothing to do with anything.


----------



## Halivar (Apr 27, 2009)

Harr said:


> Ha, you really think that what determines whether something is competition or not is one side "explicitly saying" that they have a problem with the other side?? Funny...
> 
> It doesn't matter if the WotC staff and the Paizo staff have daily group hugs, picnics in the sunshine every weekend and give each other "cause it's Monday" gifts... WotC made Paizo into competition, and they are both in fact now competition to each other. Whether one has an explicit problem with the other has nothing to do with anything.



Nobody said they weren't competing. WotC has merely said it welcomes the competition, and thinks rather highly of it.


----------



## concerro (Apr 27, 2009)

Festivus said:


> My 4E PHB has an index... and I almost never use it since everything is organized into a few select pages that I have ever needed to look anything up (page 277 anyone?)
> 
> My 4E DMG has an index... the only other book where I might need to go look something up.
> 
> Everything else I don't really understand the need for an index (as far as my 4E books go).  Things are organized either by class or alphabetically.  I don't really need indexes when it's organized like that.  I really don't have much trouble looking anything up I need.




3E's books are not always so neat, and I can't comment on 4th since the only book I now own is the PHB. I just want the issue corrected next time around.


----------



## Festivus (Apr 27, 2009)

concerro said:


> 3E's books are not always so neat, and I can't comment on 4th since the only book I now own is the PHB. I just want the issue corrected next time around.




Sorry, I missed you were referring to 3e books.  When playing 3.5 I usually look things up on d20srd.org rather than flip through books.


----------



## concerro (Apr 28, 2009)

Festivus said:


> Sorry, I missed you were referring to 3e books.  When playing 3.5 I usually look things up on d20srd.org rather than flip through books.




Sometimes the SRD is incomplete, and it only has core. Adventures/Campaigns should also have indexes. The Shackled City book, even though I know it was Paizo definitely could have used an index for finding NPC's.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (May 9, 2009)

Harr said:


> WotC made Paizo into competition




That's highly debatable.  How did they make Paizo into competition?  By making a 4e of the game?  Certainly things were done wrong.  For instance, the OGL for 4e should have been done sooner.

However, I was at DDXP running preview events of 4e.  I managed to listen into a conversation with Jason Buhman.  Even while he was at the event having played 4e for maybe 8 hours or something he was already complaining to people about how it was a horrible game and how he planned on going back to the office to recommend to everyone there who hadn't yet played it that they should not support it at all.

Plus in his blog post later, he talked about it as well.  He had been working on an informal 4e out of his house rules for the last 6 months to a year.  He expected 4e to be very close to his house rules, figuring that if he saw the problems with 3e, obviously WOTC had and they would correct the exact same thing.

The problem is, I've played a bunch of Jason's adventures for Living Greyhawk.  He pretty much rejoiced in the imbalance in the 3e rules.  All of his adventures abused corner rules, templates, overpowered monsters, optimal combinations of monsters, and death traps with nearly no way to detect them.

When he was DMing games at a convention I was at in Australia, he was tallying a death count of how many PCs he killed running his adventure.  The other DMs added their names to the list as sort of a competition.  Which I remember was easily won by Jason.  He had 15 or something.  The next closest DM had 5.

He strikes me as exactly the sort of person who would look at 4e and think that it was way too tame due to the lack of save or dies or wild combinations of unexpected templates.  I think it was inevitable that he wouldn't like it.  And Paizo rather relied on him to make their decision on what direction to go in.

Certainly WOTC had the choice to release a 4e that was horribly broken like Pathfinder is.  But I don't think that was a valid option.


----------



## JohnRTroy (May 9, 2009)

Majoru Oakheart said:


> He strikes me as exactly the sort of person who would look at 4e and think that it was way too tame due to the lack of save or dies or wild combinations of unexpected templates.  I think it was inevitable that he wouldn't like it.  And Paizo rather relied on him to make their decision on what direction to go in.
> 
> Certainly WOTC had the choice to release a 4e that was horribly broken like Pathfinder is.  But I don't think that was a valid option.




It's pretty funny how D&D was "broken" all this time until 4e came along.  What some people call broken other people actually call messing with traditional archetypes and situations.  

I think Pathfinder will do well.


----------



## JohnRTroy (May 9, 2009)

pawsplay said:


> The term Githyanki comes from a George RR Martin novel, and the githyanki/illithid relationship from a Niven novel. The culture of the Drow is Melnibone, plus a spider motif. Mind flayers were inspired by the cover of a Brian Lumley novel. Modrons are kind of unique, but definitely draw on Flatland, and remind me a lot of the beings in The Mote In God's Eye, who are also caste-driven.
> 
> Kender are a Dragonlance-specific phenomenon.
> 
> I'll give you the beholder.




It doesn't matter in the eyes of the law and literature yet.  Ultimately, following your standards, there are only 7 plots and no real true ideas.

Specific expressions are protected IP.  You can have a generic cape and flying superhero but there's only one Superman, for instance.  The examples I provide above are those specific archetypical expressions that inspired the future generations, thus, WoTC is right to say those things are protected.


----------

