The issue of the buy-in

[iamnikchick]

Phil Reed hits the nail on the head regarding the WotC $5000 Developer Kit Buy-in:In my mind, the fee isn't the problem. In fact, I think that there should be a fee to use the D&D name and a special, new, trademarked logo.

The problem is that after a few months there is no fee.

This dynamic (how the pay-to-play-devs and the free-devs are going to

Comments

[hackard]

I have no way of knowing if the things I want to release are even possible under a new system, and I won't know until I've financially committed? Not smart.

That would be my biggest worry as well. A company that's going to pay the fee already should have an idea what their fall and winter 2008 releases are going to be. If the rules or the licence don't support those ideas, that's a lot of planning that has to be scrapped, and I don't know if there's time to gin up a whole new slate of releases in time to meet the August ship date.

[bryant]

This. If you know you're doing settings or adventures, your odds are great. If you're thinking of class books or race books, the ground is somewhat shakier, although it's a bet I'd personally make. Books which change rules are a bad bet, IMHO.

[adamjury]

One of the real dangers for advanced access is for companies who plan on releasing 3 or 4 products for 4e in 2008 -- if any of them slip into January/February, they'll be stuck in the expected glut of "public" 4e products, and I have a feeling that distributors and stores will be stocking light on those, initially, and even established companies will hurt those months as the buying dollars are diluted.

This situation simply has too many variables.

[kosmic]

From a player's perspective, it would be nice to see solid setting for 4e. My faith in Wizards is dwindling, particularly with the MMO direction 4e seems to be taking, and I am left wondering if the Realms and Eberron aren't going to be reduced to a series of dungeons connected by roads. It would be nice to see Freeport upfront and available as a fleshed out campaign setting, not to mention that its history with 3e. Its a name people know, and I presume 4e is one of the reasons the Pirate's Guide to Freeport is crunch free with optional plugin books

[bryant]

I think the mindshare that Green Ronin and Necromancer earned from being early to the 3E party will carry over to the 4E party. If it was a new game, being early might matter more, but y'all have the reputation of being smart with the system and the reputation for quality product.

But! It's not my business, so that advice is worth what you paid for it.

[hackard]

No brass dragons?!? 4E sucks!! ;-)

[josephbrowning]

"which may not be possible."

Until we see the license you're right in that we don't know if it's possible to fill the gaps. I'm wondering if something like "No other open material may be used in conjunction with 4e open material" will be in the license. Such a thing would force forward migration and prevent "old fluff, new rules" products.

We'll have to see.

joe b.

[angusabranson]

Personally I think they should have given the companies that put up the 5k a full year exclusive - I reckon that would have made the decision easier for a number of companies, even if some of them waited until June to see the rules and the reception before signing up.

As it is 5k for a five month window which you have to start soliciting some of the distributors product info in about six weeks time for your August releases (the earliest time to release 4E material) makes matters very tricky.