I was reminded of the D&D player's handbook the other day, and I thought to myself, who in the world buys this thing?

1) D&D claims to have only a "default setting" (wotc apparently takes pain not to capitalize it), and what Greyhawk elements there are (like the gods and spell names like Mordenkainen) will only decrease player ownership of the gaming experience.

2) 3 core books @ $30 each = free, highly portable SRD + 2 sentences of rules. (1. chargen, 2. CR -> exp equation)
2.5) *2 editions = $200 w/ tax.

and finally,

3) (This is my main question) Some publishing aspirants here are reluctant to mark their products OGL instead of d20 out of principle, but in the end acquieces to the d20 Dark Mark, because there are people who "only buy d20".
These authors fear players and consumers thinking that even a purely SRD-centric OGL product will still be d20-incompatible--an impossibility. Why do consumers think this way? Mongoose's "core" line is just that--SRD + chargen/exp rules.
3.5) Aren't people who play roleplaying games smarter than this? Roleplaying may not require genius intellect, but there's at least some spark required to deal with things like numbers, dice pools, and deciding that seeing is harder at night in the fog. Who are the people too dumb to realize that OGL products, if stated or implied to be based purely on the SRD, is perfectly compatible with D&D/d20 by definition?

disclaimer: I'm a games outsider. I play seldomly, own just a bare few game books, and I'm not trying to design or publish a game.

I bought it and I'd be happy to buy it again.

1) In my experience, many people like building their own setting with D&D.  Alternatively, there are plenty of published settings to choose from.  The lack of a detailed setting, in this case, is a-ok.

2) I don't think most folk are aware of an easy to reference SRD online (despite such resources as d20srd.org).  Those that are, like me, may prefer using beautifully illustrated books to learn and play instead of a lengthy printout.

3) OGL just means that the book is making use of open content, potentially d20 or something else.  Usually it means the product is a d20 product, using either the D&D SRD or the Modern SRD, but even then it often has substantial alterations.

As the resident d20-phile designer, allow me to retort:

1) You've taken one trivially minor aspect of D&D and queried why it doesn't drive all purchase decisions? I think you've answered your own questions. I'll add, however, that for every person who might worry about their "decreased ownership", there are probably five who are happy to see that material in the game. Many don't use it but like to see it for nostalgia purposes (keep in mind, the material you refer to is from one of the original settings of the game). Those who couldn't care less just skip it and move on. I venture to say that no one uses all of the material from the core books.

2) If you took a survey of how much people on these boards spend on games in a year, it would make $200 pale in comparison. Also, of course, your position is inaccurate in that only the DM really needs to buy all three books. The players really only need the PHB, and in many groups (including mine), some of the players don't buy and share with the others. But, as game books go, the D&D core books are remarkably inexpensive.

3) Aren't gamers smart enough to ignore bad cover art? or buy a game by reading reviews without considering who wrote it? It's marketing--it's not about intelligence but about creating an emotional response in the potential customer. Poisoncraft (my first book) is far and away my best seller and, I'm quite certain, in no small part because it bears the d20 logo. But your question also makes a couple of false assumptions. First, not all d20/OGL books are complete. Second, not all OGL books are 100% compatible. By virtue of the d20 license, the publisher is not permitted to alter the meaning of game terms, etc. It's not just related to chargen and experience rules. So, the d20 brand legitimately has a strong connection with D&D; OGL far less so.

Hello,

This sentence makes me suspicious:

Some publishing aspirants here are reluctant to mark their products OGL instead of d20 out of principle, but in the end acquieces to the d20 Dark Mark, because there are people who "only buy d20".