>Brad Thompson wrote: > > Jim Butler > > > > I think Wizards becomes less happy with the license when it sees > > publishers pursuing interests that are counter to its own. The > > miniatures business is one example of this, and you're seeing changes in > > the license to reflect WotC's desire to protect itself. > > I'd be curious to hear whether you think Wizards would be more or less > happy > with projects like the upcoming T20 Traveller release. It ties the d20 > system to an entirely different set of IP that is not dependent on the D&D > universe. Given that there are already several versions of Traveller out > there, the only reason I can see for a gamer to buy T20 is if they already > own a PHB (excepting those ambitious folks who simply buy everything). I > don't see much upside for Wizards in this equation, but if you do I'd love > to hear it.
To be fair, I'd be surprised if Wizards gave much concern to any science fiction game release outside of Star Wars or Star Trek. They've been down the non-mass-media SF road before with Alternity, and I think they learned a number of important lessons from it. As it relates to d20, I suspect they'd be happy about Traveller. Any product that requires use of the PHB (no matter how much use might be required) is a plus to Wizards. Continued play in a world that requires any of the core D&D books is a win for Wizards. Why? Because staying in the d20 system keeps those players in the network. As they continue to play, they'll eventually buy replacement copies of their books. As they introduce new players to the game, those players will purchase new PHBs. Good Gaming! Jim Butler, President Bastion Press, Inc. http://www.bastionpress.com _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
