I've been seeing a lot of posts here and on other forums expressing dismay and more than a little anger that Paizo is not directly supporting 4E (i.e., creating modules). Many have implied, or outright declared, Paizo's making a big mistake and will either 1) eventually switch to producting 4E material or 2) will collapse. Posters suggest that the company leadership does not know what it's doing, too stubborn to acknowledge the inevitable, or is taking too great a risk for its own good.
This stroked my curiosity. Paizo has made it clear on its press releases and follow-up posts here and "abroad" the reasoning of its actions. Yet why aren't the original protesters pushing WotC to change its GSL policy?
Hmmm....I'll bite.
I thought (and still think) that the D&D brand is an overwhelming advantage. However, the GSL is so amazing craptacular and one-sided that it is completely useless, essentially meaning Paizo going 4E is simply not an option. I don't know if the Paizo folks saw this coming or just "got lucky," but in the context of the GSL Pathfinder looks like a stroke of genius.
The jury is still out on whether Pathfinder is a game I want to play. D&D 4E is, but I am not comfortable supporting WoTC given their handling of the GSL. I'm committed to running some tables at Gencon; beyond that, I don't know what I'll do. The whole situation has honestly tarnished my enthusiasm for RPGs in general, at least in the short term.
You sound like me, everytime I hear a Largest Movie Release in history. Well yeah, ticket prices are up, more people, etc.
Now if they would convert to population and ticket prices say for the first weekend of Star Wars, how would it stack up?
Thanks roguerouge for your post
Actually, I teach media history, so one of the things that I do in my course is run a "most profitable movie ever" discussion, using constant dollars and percentage return on investment. Current contenders include: Birth of a Nation (in release for 33 years), Deep Throat (25 grand to make, 300 million in gross revenues), Gone with the Wind, and, of course, The Blair Witch Project. You'll note that all four were not major studio releases...
Now, if you include non-movie sales like merchandizing as part of the "movie" then Star Wars gets interesting. Part of why it gets interesting, however, is that we "count" only the sales on on figurines, books, lunch pails, licensing deals, etc. because it's hard to factor in production and marketing costs without access to their books.
Similarly, it's going to be hard to Monday Morning QB WotC's 4th edition profitability without that kind of information.
Actually, I teach media history, so one of the things that I do in my course is run a "most profitable movie ever" discussion, using constant dollars and percentage return on investment.
You sound like me, everytime I hear a Largest Movie Release in history. Well yeah, ticket prices are up, more people, etc.
Now if they would convert to population and ticket prices say for the first weekend of Star Wars, how would it stack up?
Thanks roguerouge for your post
Not to derail too badly but thanks for that info. Yes I wonder about the real dollars version everytime I read that Such and Such a Movie is the largest grossing yet.
First thing that comes to mind is how well has The Wizard of Oz fared?
Lastly thanks for responding back to me as well.
A common message from the Thought Police is that 4E is the most successful release in the history of gaming. We don't need no stinkin 3rd party support. I think the lie will be revealed in the long run. Us longtime gamers like diversity, and freedom.
It never ceases to amaze me that people never take into account population growth when they say "Best selling ever!" In 1980, there were 226 million people in the US. Now, there's over 300 million. If you didn't sell more widgits now than in 1980, you have a massive failure on your hands, as you have so many more people to sell to! An identical quality product in a static market should sell 30 percent more units based on that population factor alone. Heck, since 2000, your sales figures should go up 6 percent, even if your sales rate stays the same.
(Yes, yes, there's a time delay involved, as 6 year-olds today are slackers and don't work in factories any more here. But the principle remains valid.)
Best selling ever... and are they even accounting for the annual increase of cost of living and inflation? 1980s dollars are bought much more than today's dollars, even with its recent slide, due to those factors alone.
Very good point! Spin Doctors are Thought Police in a sense!
|
For the record: Mexican Coke is still made with sucrose and it is damn tasty.
Okay.
Subsidies in this country drive sucrose prices up. That's why "Coke Classic" tastes nothing like "Coca Cola" used to. That's why it doesn't taste the same as "Mexican Coca Cola" which I believe is still made with sucrose; I haven't checked in a year.
I just got back from Mexico not that long ago and dammit I couldn't find a Coca Cola anywhere. It was all Pepsi, I had to come back to the states to get a Coke.
I just got back from Mexico not that long ago and dammit I couldn't find a Coca Cola anywhere. It was all Pepsi, I had to come back to the states to get a Coke.For the record: Mexican Coke is still made with sucrose and it is damn tasty.
Okay.
Subsidies in this country drive sucrose prices up. That's why "Coke Classic" tastes nothing like "Coca Cola" used to. That's why it doesn't taste the same as "Mexican Coca Cola" which I believe is still made with sucrose; I haven't checked in a year.
Kosher for Passover Coke is also made with sucrose. I bought a lot of 2 liters this year, and have been hoarding my last 2. German Coke never switched to the gross HFCS, so it was a real treat to discover KfP Coke this year.
|
just look at Games Workshop's plummetting sales figures for the last few years. If it wasn't for their LotR line, they would have folded awhile ago.
Actually way I heard it the main reason there having such trouble is becaus the LotR line has turned into a huge financial black hole caused when the LotR bubble burst after the films ended.
Actually way I heard it the main reason there having such trouble is becaus the LotR line has turned into a huge financial black hole caused when the LotR bubble burst after the films ended.
Not surprising, IMO. Other than being the setting for the fellowship's quest, Middle-Earth itself is quite bland. There's some interesting stuff to be done with for instance Rohan, but it's all quite limited. For RPG purposes, the only real appeal is the LotR connotation and that doesn't last. For wargames it's really the same thing: the only thing that sets it apart from other fantasy/medieval wargames in a positive way is the LotR claim to fame. Wargames IMX want a little bit (actually, quite a bit) more than that and have an incredible wealth of games to choose from (often with their own even more interesting features, like historical simulation and "what if" scenarios). To have lasting success, any kind of game based on the IP needs to be a really good game in its own right, and that's sadly not usually the case.
Games based on hype need to generate cash quickly and should never be depended on to remain profitable beyond the short term.
Actually way I heard it the main reason there having such trouble is becaus the LotR line has turned into a huge financial black hole caused when the LotR bubble burst after the films ended.Not surprising, IMO. Other than being the setting for the fellowship's quest, Middle-Earth itself is quite bland. There's some interesting stuff to be done with for instance Rohan, but it's all quite limited. For RPG purposes, the only real appeal is the LotR connotation and that doesn't last. For wargames it's really the same thing: the only thing that sets it apart from other fantasy/medieval wargames in a positive way is the LotR claim to fame. Wargames IMX want a little bit (actually, quite a bit) more than that and have an incredible wealth of games to choose from (often with their own even more interesting features, like historical simulation and "what if" scenarios). To have lasting success, any kind of game based on the IP needs to be a really good game in its own right, and that's sadly not usually the case.
Games based on hype need to generate cash quickly and should never be depended on to remain profitable beyond the short term.
Don't know if its a money maker or not but if so I find it very sad. There version of Elves and the Riders of Rohon are the very best. The Dwarves are classic dwarves without all the burnig axes that some figures have in other high fantasy lines. I prefer LOTR Trolls (and I'm talking about the minatures not story or role playing applications here) to the carrot nose trolls of classic D'n'D.
Don't get me wrong, I like all kinds of minatures but to give my game a sense of culture and I perfere a set style of minatures that LoTR offers. It will be sad when they drop this line, though with the Hobbit being made soon, they many not.
Don't know if its a money maker or not but if so I find it very sad. There version of Elves and the Riders of Rohon are the very best. The Dwarves are classic dwarves without all the burnig axes that some figures have in other high fantasy lines. I prefer LOTR Trolls (and I'm talking about the minatures not story or role playing applications here) to the carrot nose trolls of classic D'n'D.
Don't get me wrong, I like all kinds of minatures but to give my game a sense of culture and I perfere a set style of minatures that LoTR offers. It will be sad when they drop this line, though with the Hobbit being made soon, they many not.
I do agree that the figs are top-notch, but there has to be a game along with those to drive sales. I'm not really into wargames myself beyond a casual interest, but from what I've heard game-wise there's much better to be had.
The games not that bad, if you like skirmish games, but really the problem is there is little left to explore. LOTR was a fantastic setting, but a limited one, at lest in terms of selling new stuff. And honestly I don't know what they could do about it except maybe make fewer miniatures and perhaps sell pre-colored ones like Reaper is now doing. That would really get my cash as I can't paint to save my life, prepainted are about the only thing I'm paying Wizards for now'a'days. But as I said I like the look and for me LOTR elves are my elves minature wize.
And since at this point we are sooo far off subject I'll just throw in one other point, LOTR minatures are not the only line I'd like to see as pre-painted, with any amount of luck I'd love to see Paizo do the same with the Pathfinder line.
Not surprising, IMO. Other than being the setting for the fellowship's quest, Middle-Earth itself is quite bland. There's some interesting stuff to be done with for instance Rohan, but it's all quite limited.
The reason it all seems quite bland is simple; it's the template for your standard FRPG settings. Dark Lords, orcs, trolls, elves, dwarves, halflings, rangers, etc. All a bit too familiar because of the success of the books (and later the movies). Success has made it overly familiar...
|
With the OGL WOTC could use stuff that came from it in their own products. If another company did something really cool then they could use it later (feat, spell, etc.). Now with the GSL they can use whatever they want, but what happens when something is released for 4E without using the GSL? Kenzerco is releasing a huge 4E compatible book, which will have all kinds of neat little powers. Has WOTC painted themselves into a corner? I have no idea if I am right or wrong about this...but under the OGL (which wasn't as onerous as the new license) they could use some of the content, but since they have a GSL, which very few people will use, they can't use any of this product at all. I know that game rules can't be copyrighted, but it seems to me that WOTC will be on the outside looking in if anyone releases even "compatible," not licensed, material. Didn't the Unearthed Arcana book have optional rules that were developed by other companies? Now they won't have access to this "free" development.
There's no need to protest. I think they've really shot themselves in the foot with this one. They were first among equals, but in trying to assert some bizarre form of dominance they're leading their own audience behind.
Thanks,
Scott
|
|
just look at Games Workshop's plummetting sales figures for the last few years. If it wasn't for their LotR line, they would have folded awhile ago.Actually way I heard it the main reason there having such trouble is becaus the LotR line has turned into a huge financial black hole caused when the LotR bubble burst after the films ended.
Yeah, from what I remember off-hand is that they're locked in a license that's lasted longer than than the bubble. Maybe it'll pick up with the Hobbit... dunno. Personally, I can't wait until the license expires. As much as I'm a fan of the LotR books (and movies), I've no interest in the wargame, and time and resources spent on the LotR wargame maen less on their other game lines (I play 40K, BTW).
|
|
With the OGL WOTC could use stuff that came from it in their own products. If another company did something really cool then they could use it later (feat, spell, etc.). Now with the GSL they can use whatever they want, but what happens when something is released for 4E without using the GSL? Kenzerco is releasing a huge 4E compatible book, which will have all kinds of neat little powers. Has WOTC painted themselves into a corner? I have no idea if I am right or wrong about this...but under the OGL (which wasn't as onerous as the new license) they could use some of the content, but since they have a GSL, which very few people will use, they can't use any of this product at all. I know that game rules can't be copyrighted, but it seems to me that WOTC will be on the outside looking in if anyone releases even "compatible," not licensed, material. Didn't the Unearthed Arcana book have optional rules that were developed by other companies? Now they won't have access to this "free" development.
There's no need to protest. I think they've really shot themselves in the foot with this one. They were first among equals, but in trying to assert some bizarre form of dominance they're leading their own audience behind.
Thanks,
Scott
Unless I missed something, there is no open content with the GSL. That means under no circumstances can WotC use anything another company publishes using the GSL. They cannot reprint feats, powers, classes, or whatever, without it being a copyright violation. They can come up with their own versions, but they could not, for example, do what Paizo is doing with the Tome of Horrors with a 4E book of monsters.
of course if they do try such a grab then the company they grab it from is likely to be completely out of the GSL business if they object. But that is how WotC will wind up on the outside of their own agreement, not if too many people publish compatible products without using the GSL.
My guess is that's what it says in theory and question if it's even mildly enforceable.
We have been through this rodeo ride before, no?
WotC cannot protect their mechanics. They cannot protect any game concepts that have been used before in previous editions that are indeed open content, or protect anything that overlaps with another game-type. They cannot protect general ideas of fantasy that the game that makes up the majority of fantasy. They cannot even stop a company from claiming that the stuff written by them is compatible with 4th edition right on the front cover of their book.
I think most people signing up for the GSL are doing so because they have decided to play nice and didn't want to burn bridges...that or they see the value of the logo.
Either way, I'm not sure if this in any way effects Paizo, seeing is they have mentioned they are interested in possibly making 4th edition material in the future, just not the pathfinder line. I don't think that has stopped has it?
That and while I agree somewhat that I don't think this edition will have the longevity that 3.5 and 2nd had, I don't think it will be anything close to a failure for WotC. Perhaps they have lost some of the older, more constant gamers but they will probably pick up new ones and still have the majority most likely.
|
|
With the OGL WOTC could use stuff that came from it in their own products. If another company did something really cool then they could use it later (feat, spell, etc.). Now with the GSL they can use whatever they want, but what happens when something is released for 4E without using the GSL? Kenzerco is releasing a huge 4E compatible book, which will have all kinds of neat little powers. Has WOTC painted themselves into a corner? I have no idea if I am right or wrong about this...but under the OGL (which wasn't as onerous as the new license) they could use some of the content, but since they have a GSL, which very few people will use, they can't use any of this product at all. I know that game rules can't be copyrighted, but it seems to me that WOTC will be on the outside looking in if anyone releases even "compatible," not licensed, material. Didn't the Unearthed Arcana book have optional rules that were developed by other companies? Now they won't have access to this "free" development.
There's no need to protest. I think they've really shot themselves in the foot with this one. They were first among equals, but in trying to assert some bizarre form of dominance they're leading their own audience behind.
Thanks,
Scott
Unless I missed something, there is no open content with the GSL. That means under no circumstances can WotC use anything another company publishes using the GSL. They cannot reprint feats, powers, classes, or whatever, without it being a copyright violation. They can come up with their own versions, but they could not, for example, do what Paizo is doing with the Tome of Horrors with a 4E book of monsters.
of course if they do try such a grab then the company they grab it from is likely to be completely out of the GSL business if they object. But that is how WotC will wind up on the outside of their own agreement, not if too many people publish compatible products without using the GSL.
If they put something another company made in the SRD, the other company's printing of it retroactively becomes a GSL violation.
Coke spent a lot of money changing their winning recipe and nobody bought the new product because it tasted horrible.So what's the story behind New Coke?Don't get me started on New Coke and the whole sucrose/high fructose corn syrup smoke-and-mirrors mindf@*~.
You'll make me sound like a whacko conspiracy theorist.
(pardon if this has already been said) The new coke problem is like crystal pepsi(sp). We got so use to brown soda that when the clear pepsi came out, we all thought it went bad in shipping.
As for the 4E war, I played 4th on the release day and while it was interesting I'm in no hurry, if theres any hurry in me to start with, to buy 4th. Wizards, in a rather odd way, is like the two sodas. They changed how they sell D&D and it'll prob cost them in the long run. Its not to say I'm turning on Wizards. I'm just buying their non-D&D stuff. *shrugs* Guess we'll see.
|
|
If they put something another company made in the SRD, the other company's printing of it retroactively becomes a GSL violation.
And WotC actively commits a copyright or general IP violation.
Again, there is no open content with the GSL. WotC could not even publish expansion material to a GSL licensee's material without signing a separate agreement with the company.
Personally, as Pathfinder fan, I welcome the hostilities from the 4th edition fanboys/fangirls...
they are getting rather sickening now on the Amazon ratings too... which is quite a lark as Amazon could really care less (I would doubt that role playing products make up more than 1% of their total business interest... if even a mere minute fraction of that much). WOTC, along with everyone else, is pretty meaningless to them... so as such, real customers can say what they really feel about the 4th edition product, good or bad. And when a 4th edition product gets a bad review, the anti-4th edition defamation crew comes in with comments "Boy, the haters are really out in full" and that sort of useless crap.
Hey, 4th edition policers, keep it up! When a product is lacking so much that it requires people to jump up with a rabid defense that would even send the most hardcore of defending lawyers screaming for the hills, it really shows that the product is doomed to fall on its face. The more that the pro-4th radicals launch their hissy-fits the more fence riding gamers they push over into the greener grass of Pathfinder.
Pathfinder will survive.... with people like me willing to help fellow gamers in the group buy their core initial books if they cannot afford otherwise.
Personally, as Pathfinder fan, I welcome the hostilities from the 4th edition fanboys/fangirls...
Can't we all sit in a circle and sing Kum-Bye-Ya?
you'd think that the past 10-20 years would teach us about the flaws in extremist belief systems. ya know when the ends of the celery you're cooking with (the stuff on the extreme ends) gets dried and brown and you cut it off? I kind of get that feeling with many protest-minded gamers 3.x or 4e .... just cut em away and use the part that's still good.
(sorry, feeling snarky today)
Personally, as Pathfinder fan, I welcome the hostilities from the 4th edition fanboys/fangirls...
Can't we all sit in a circle and sing Kum-Bye-Ya?
Well, yes, of course... despite your login name you are not acting like a typical rabid fanboy... well, at least not at the moment. :)
Didn't wizards change the song to "come-buy-all"?
You Win!
|
|
Absolutely! Heaven knows that I haven't the foggiest clue about what I am doing with Paizo! Thank god for all the brilliant minds on the various messageboards! Now if I can only figure out how to implement the "go to 4th edition, stay with an unaltered 3.5, change 3.5 but not too much, and change 3.5 so much that it isn't backwards compatible" strategy, I'll be great! :)
-Lisa
Excellent. Glad to know I am appreciated. I normally get $200.00/hour to consult, but I will take $50.00 a post in store credit as fair trade.
::takes of tinfoil hat::
So what's the story behind New Coke?Don't get me started on New Coke and the whole sucrose/high fructose corn syrup smoke-and-mirrors mindf@*~.
You'll make me sound like a whacko conspiracy theorist.Okay.
Subsidies in this country drive sucrose prices up. That's why "Coke Classic" tastes nothing like "Coca Cola" used to. That's why it doesn't taste the same as "Mexican Coca Cola" which I believe is still made with sucrose; I haven't checked in a year.
It's NOW made with, and has been for quite a few years, with high fructose corn syrup.
So.
They wanted to switch from sucrose to HFCS. They had to bring out this "new Coke" drek, have it shot down, and return to "Coca Cola Classic" with HFCS. Hopefully, nobody would notice, unless they went to Costa Rica and got an actual Coca Cola made with sucrose and put two and two together.
I just want to say I have no proof of any of this, nor do I wish Coca Cola any ill will or loss of market share to Pepsi, which I do not drink unless I'm at Taco Bell.(goes back to safe room and recalibrates tinfoil pyramid hat).
The switch to High Fructose Corn Syrup had gotten serously underway in the United States five years prior to the introduction of New Coke. It had been substantially completed prior to New Coke being introduced.
Where the protest is?
I can tell you:
In my wallet. And on my bank account. Many many Euros of protest that would be on their bank accounts if they acted differently in a number of matters (i.e. just about everything they do really).
They probably don't care whether I rant about them and their greed and incompetence, but I guess they do care that so far that the amount of money I haven't put in the products has gone into quadruple digits, probably months ago. And there's little chance that it will change before the fifth digit turns up for the party.
On the topic of Coke:
My wife and I have endeavored for the last few years to avoid corn syrup whenever possible. Maybe it's just my imagination, but on the very rare occasion that either of us drink a Coke or Pepsi (or any other corn-syrupy beverage) we can really taste the corn and it really grosses us out. Maybe not at the moment of sipping, but as an aftertaste and we definitely smell it on each other's breath afterwards.
My tinfoil hat theory is that corn syrup is almost singularly responsible for the rise in American obesity when combined with the success of marketing soda as a beverage to be consumed at all times rather than just as a special treat.
My tinfoil hat theory is that corn syrup is almost singularly responsible for the rise in American obesity when combined with the success of marketing soda as a beverage to be consumed at all times rather than just as a special treat.
It's a contributing factor, but the real problem is twofold, IMO:
1) Super-size me! Resturants (not just fast food, either) have been increasing serving portions since about the '80s. People are conditioned to think that a "regular meal" is something that is really large enough for 2-3 people (based on a daily intake of 2000-2500 calories). A rule of thumb I use is that an entire meal should be about a double handful of food. Even with the abundance of corn syrup in place of sugar and enriched flour in place of whole grains, you can eat fairly healthy with a balanced diet and sensible portions.
2) Couch potatos. Exercise (to include sports) has a less common activity with the rise of cable/sattelite TV, game consoles, the Internet, etc. When kids get into the habit of sitting around with their computer/PS/X-Box as their "social activity" instead of "going outside to play" (usually by running around in some fashon), they don't get enough exercise to be healthy. The guidelines are the same as for adults: at least 20-40 continuous minutes of aerobic activity 3-5 days a week.
BTW, I drink about 2-3 cans worth of Mountain Dew a day and weigh 183 lbs at 6 ft, 2 in tall... I also watch what I eat and exercise regularly.
|
BTW, I drink about 2-3 cans worth of Mountain Dew a day and weigh 183 lbs at 6 ft, 2 in tall... I also watch what I eat and exercise regularly.
You also might have an extraordinary metabolism.
I am all for a healthy life, but not at the expense of your happiness.
I would rather live to 70 and die happy than spend every day counting calories/nutrients and exercising only for the exercise and living to 80. I just don't enjoy exercise, period.
Now, I would like to lose some weight to be more comfortable, but I plan on doing that by avoiding what you mention: consuming unnecessary foods. Just say no! it makes me just as happy to eat a sandwich as to eat at Wendy's.
BTW, I drink about 2-3 cans worth of Mountain Dew a day and weigh 183 lbs at 6 ft, 2 in tall... I also watch what I eat and exercise regularly.You also might have an extraordinary metabolism.
I am all for a healthy life, but not at the expense of your happiness.
I would rather live to 70 and die happy than spend every day counting calories/nutrients and exercising only for the exercise and living to 80. I just don't enjoy exercise, period.
Now, I would like to lose some weight to be more comfortable, but I plan on doing that by avoiding what you mention: consuming unnecessary foods. Just say no! it makes me just as happy to eat a sandwich as to eat at Wendy's.
Part of it is my metabolism, yes. It's not what it was during my teens/early 20's, though.
I'm not saying you need to track every single calorie, obsess over your food intake, or exercise for the sake of exercise. Heck, I'm not a fan of exercise for it's own sake, either. However, I also enjoy tennis, volleyball, and other activities that are good exercise and walk rather than drive when possible (pretty much anything within 2-3 miles, unless it involves transporting more than about 50 lbs or something that can't fit in a backpack/be conveniently carried).
The best part, IMO, about watching the serving portions instead of whether it's "good/bad" (apart from making sure you eat a fairly balanced variety) is that you can actually enjoy tasty food. You can even eat fast food (burgers, pizza, Taco Bell, etc.) and snacks/sweets if you keep the portions moderate.
|
|
On the topic of Coke:
My wife and I have endeavored for the last few years to avoid corn syrup whenever possible. Maybe it's just my imagination, but on the very rare occasion that either of us drink a Coke or Pepsi (or any other corn-syrupy beverage) we can really taste the corn and it really grosses us out. Maybe not at the moment of sipping, but as an aftertaste and we definitely smell it on each other's breath afterwards.
My tinfoil hat theory is that corn syrup is almost singularly responsible for the rise in American obesity when combined with the success of marketing soda as a beverage to be consumed at all times rather than just as a special treat.
The worse part of it is that Soda is the close to the cheapest thing on the shelf. A gallon of juice is around $3-$4, flavored waters are weird and use questionable sugar substitutes, plain water is just bleech, meanwhile 2 liters of pepsi is running $1.50 to $2.00. What we need is a Fat Tax on soda of around %80 and maybe a fat tax across the board on certain foods.
|
|
On the topic of Coke:
My wife and I have endeavored for the last few years to avoid corn syrup whenever possible. Maybe it's just my imagination, but on the very rare occasion that either of us drink a Coke or Pepsi (or any other corn-syrupy beverage) we can really taste the corn and it really grosses us out. Maybe not at the moment of sipping, but as an aftertaste and we definitely smell it on each other's breath afterwards.
My tinfoil hat theory is that corn syrup is almost singularly responsible for the rise in American obesity when combined with the success of marketing soda as a beverage to be consumed at all times rather than just as a special treat.
The worse part of it is that Soda is the close to the cheapest thing on the shelf. A gallon of juice is around $3-$4, flavored waters are weird and use questionable sugar substitutes, plain water is just bleech, meanwhile 2 liters of pepsi is running $1.50 to $2.00. What we need is a Fat Tax on soda of around %80 and maybe a fat tax across the board on certain foods.
Same thing with Fast Food. Hmm, I can buy 2 burgers, a large fry, and a large soda; or I can buy one healthier submarine sandwich. What are most people going to choose?
Hmm, I can buy 2 burgers, a large fry, and a large soda; or I can buy one healthier submarine sandwich. What are most people going to choose?
Other than the fact that I don't like fast food burgers (other than "real" ones like the BK Angus), I'll go with 1 burger, small fries, small soda and save the extra money.
The worse part of it is that Soda is the close to the cheapest thing on the shelf. A gallon of juice is around $3-$4, flavored waters are weird and use questionable sugar substitutes, plain water is just bleech, meanwhile 2 liters of pepsi is running $1.50 to $2.00.
Doesn't that put soda at the same price as juice? Two liters for $1.50 to $2.00 is essentially the same as $3.00-$4.00 per gallon, no?
|
|
[ Does anyone have any idea though how much Wizards/Hasbro 'borrowed' from other companies under the OGL though? Spells? Feats? Anything else?
As far as I am aware, the only non-WotC stuff is large chunks of Unearthed Arcana and two monsters at the back of MM2.
I'm sure some of their stuff must be similar to earlier 3rd party products, but whether or not this was the result of two designers coming up with the same idea independently I couldn't say.