4e / GSL WotC to Revise D&D 4th Edition GSL and SRD

[darjr]

Thank you for listening. I am hopeful that the changes will be for the better.

[Dragon Snack]

Good news AND comedy gold, all in one thread!

[evilref]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

I find this comment interesting. How exactly is it poor reasoning and logic that would lead me to the possibilities I posted? They are perfectly logical conclusions, and I suspect they carry with them more than just a bit of truth.

A) All available evidence (from inside and outside of WotC) suggests that not only is 4e selling very well, but that month on month it's outselling 3.5, 3e and 2e.

B) For it to be a PR blunder is an entirely subjective opinion and would also require vast numbers of people to say that they're not going to buy 4e solely because of the GSL. I've not seen that, and I doubt you have either. Moreover given the above sales, that PR blunder can't exactly be vast.

Mostly though I just found it a cheap attempt to make a snarky comment that doesn't actually have any supportable evidence behind it (I'll give you PR blunder, but not vast). The tiresome '4e is selling badly' as so much independent argument against it that it's gone into pure fantasyland (it might well be selling badly in A store/X stores but globally it's selling very well).

[Glyfair]

Originally Posted by Orcus

Which, of course, will mean that Necro can then support 4E, as we have long wanted to do.

And honestly, this is exactly the outcome I hope for. I was never a Necromancer Games fanatic. I had strong respect and bought more than my fair share, but wouldn't specifically search out their products.

However, looking at all the 3rd party companies that were considering putting out 4E products, they were the only ones that excited me. I hope I get to finally see the 4E "Wizard's Amulet", even if it is too late to fill that exact same role.

[Jack99]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

I find this comment interesting. How exactly is it poor reasoning and logic that would lead me to the possibilities I posted? They are perfectly logical conclusions, and I suspect they carry with them more than just a bit of truth.

They are logical conclusions if you ignore the sales of 4e.

4e is doing well. Exceedingly well, according to Mr. Bill Slavicsek. Considering the fast sell-out of the biggest first print ever, and that they are all-ready in their 3rd print, it might just be true. Considering the fact that the core books were ranked higher than ever on several best-seller lists, which are based on actual buys by customers, it might just be true.

Of course, due to your intense dislike of 4e, you actually rather believe that they failed and that it is all a cover up.

Which is more likely. That the employees and bosses of a public company lie about figures, about the size of their print runs, and somehow manage to trick several reputable bestseller lists into "giving" their books a good spot high up on the list, or that you are wrong, and that 4e, despite that you don't like it, does quite well.

Cheers

[Wisdom Penalty]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

I find this comment interesting. How exactly is it poor reasoning and logic that would lead me to the possibilities I posted? They are perfectly logical conclusions, and I suspect they carry with them more than just a bit of truth.

Darrin -

You've personally lambasted WotC for the GSL, and justifiably so. Why now are you negative when they've (apparently) listened to the community and (hopefully) intend to make changes?

I understand it may be difficult to (potentially) lose an item on your List of Things to Bitch About, but surely there will be aspects of the new GSL that will prove equally open to complaint.

Patience, lad. Patience.

WP

[Fifth Element]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

I find this comment interesting. How exactly is it poor reasoning and logic that would lead me to the possibilities I posted? They are perfectly logical conclusions, and I suspect they carry with them more than just a bit of truth.

I think the main problem is you presented a false dichotomy (or trichotomy, if you include your "A+B" option). You gave only two possible reasons, whereas there are many more, as subsequent posts demonstrate.

[Darrin Drader]

Originally Posted by evilref

A) All available evidence (from inside and outside of WotC) suggests that not only is 4e selling very well, but that month on month it's outselling 3.5, 3e and 2e.

No company is going to admit that their own product is not selling well. To do so is suicide for the product line. Companies will tell people how well their product is doing right up until the week before the product is canceled. You cannot take the self professed success of a product or line at face value from any company.

B) For it to be a PR blunder is an entirely subjective opinion and would also require vast numbers of people to say that they're not going to buy 4e solely because of the GSL. I've not seen that, and I doubt you have either. Moreover given the above sales, that PR blunder can't exactly be vast.

There's evidence here and all over the internet that shows that up to 50% of the current player base has no intention of switching to 4E. Assuming that those numbers are real (and I'm not going to bother debating whether or not you can believe the validity of internet polls) then if there's something they can do to get more people to switch, it would be wise to consider that option. Making the license more open lowers the barriers preventing publishers from porting their existing brands to 4E, therefore potentially bringing in players who are loyal to those publishers and product lines.

Mostly though I just found it a cheap attempt to make a snarky comment that doesn't actually have any supportable evidence behind it (I'll give you PR blunder, but not vast).

There's no supportable evidence that I'm wrong either, and it was neither cheap nor was it an attempt. It was free and it was pure speculation, and as people like to speculate about things they have no real information about around here, there is nothing indicating of "bad reasoning or logic" at all. In fact, in this thread's twin, other people came to exactly the same conclusions on their own. Are they equally guilty of bad reasoning and logic?

The tiresome '4e is selling badly' as so much independent argument against it that it's gone into pure fantasyland (it might well be selling badly in A store/X stores but globally it's selling very well).

4E could very well be selling badly. We don't have access to their sales data. We do not know what how many copies it has to sell for Hasbro to consider it a success. Since we don't have access to this information, it's ridiculous to point to any one piece of information and proclaim it a success or failure at this point.

[Filcher]

Say it with me, "Dear Mods, merge these threads!"

===

Interesting that:

Goodman Games and Mongoose are already in.

Pazio is committed to 3.75, so they're out no matter what.

Green Ronin is off doing non-D&D material.

Basically, IMO, we are left with the Wizards changing the GSL for Necro, and only for Necro. Bummer that it had to happen a week after they lost the APG.

[JeffB]

Good News! A Big Thank You to Scott and Linae. I hope these changes prove to be a good thing for everyone-WOTC, The 3rd Party Publishers,and the 4E fans!

[Glyfair]

Originally Posted by Filcher

Interesting that:

Goodman Games and Mongoose are already in.

Pazio is committed to 3.75, so they're out no matter what.

Green Ronin is off doing non-D&D material.

Basically, IMO, we are left with the Wizards changing the GSL for Necro, and only for Necro. Bummer that it had to happen a week after they lost the APG.

Here is one thing I'd like to see:

I'd like enough changes that Kobold Quarterly can support 4E (either in the main magazine, or through a parallel publication).

[xechnao]

Originally Posted by lurkinglidda

Actually, Scott and yours truly pushed for this possible CLM. We intended to have everything buttoned up by GenCon. Realizing that was not going to happen I requested we put up the announcement.

Or maybe option G), GSL is used as a marketing tool to provide as much attention to D&D as possible in the OGL legacy era.

[Fifth Element]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

No company is going to admit that their own product is not selling well. To do so is suicide for the product line. Companies will tell people how well their product is doing right up until the week before the product is canceled. You cannot take the self professed success of a product or line at face value from any company.

ENWorld: You're no messiah!
WotC: I am the messiah! Will you please look at the sales figures? I am the messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
ENWorld: Only the false messiah denies his low sales figures!
WotC: What? Well what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I'm not the messiah!
ENWorld: He's not! He's not the messiah!

[Lord Tirian]

Originally Posted by dmccoy1693

I don't think it's to late. The GSL hasn't even gone live yet. I am hopeful (cautious, but hopeful nonetheless).

Furthermore, we all know one publisher who will go 4E, as soon as the GSL becomes more reasonable (Necro). Even if we get one extra publisher only, I'd be happy.

Cheers, LT.

[Charwoman Gene]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

it's ridiculous to point to any one piece of information and proclaim it a success or failure at this point.

Didn't stop you from using "Internet Polls" to support your argument. But IU'm not going to discuss whether or not my discussing whether or not you discussing internet polls is valid.

[Wisdom Penalty]

Originally Posted by Filcher

Basically, IMO, we are left with the Wizards changing the GSL for Necro, and only for Necro.

And that's good enough for yours truly. When I look at my bookshelf, I have WotC books, Goodman modules, and Necro modules. So this is a win.

I also have a ton of Paizo mags. You know what I'd love to see on the heels of this nice GSL news? Paizo reclaiming Dragon and Dungeon. A girl can dream, right?

WP

[Fifth Element]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

In fact, in this thread's twin, other people came to exactly the same conclusions on their own. Are they equally guilty of bad reasoning and logic.

Perhaps. The comments in the other thread were taken to task as well.

[Klaus]

Originally Posted by lurkinglidda

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/welcome

New FAQ and SRD will be posted when the revised GSL is available.

No ETA at this point. It will be available very soon.

That's great news, Linae! Much thanks go to you and Scott for the (excrutiating) hard work you've put into this.

[evilref]

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

No company is going to admit that their own product is not selling well. To do so is suicide for the product line. Companies will tell people how well their product is doing right up until the week before the product is canceled. You cannot take the self professed success of a product or line at face value from any company.

You saw that point where I said 'outside' as well, right? I mean, I know acknowledging it would also mean acknowledging your point is without support but you did see it?

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

There's evidence here and all over the internet that shows that up to 50% of the current player base has no intention of switching to 4E. Assuming that those numbers are real (and I'm not going to bother debating whether or not you can believe the validity of internet polls) then if there's something they can do to get more people to switch, it would be wise to consider that option. Making the license more open lowers the barriers preventing publishers from porting their existing brands to 4E, therefore potentially bringing in players who are loyal to those publishers and product lines.

Hey look, that's another option that doesn't come in your statement that there are only three options.

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

There's no supportable evidence that I'm wrong either, and it was neither cheap nor was it an attempt. It was free and it was pure speculation, and as people like to speculate about things they have no real information about around here, there is nothing indicating of "bad reasoning or logic" at all. In fact, in this thread's twin, other people came to exactly the same conclusions on their own. Are they equally guilty of bad reasoning and logic?

Amazon sales rank, NYT best sellers list. Number of reprints, statements on the side of the initial print run. See those, those are supportable evidence that you're wrong.

Originally Posted by Darrin Drader

4E could very well be selling badly. We don't have access to their sales data. We do not know what how many copies it has to sell for Hasbro to consider it a success. Since we don't have access to this information, it's ridiculous to point to any one piece of information and proclaim it a success or failure at this point.

A) Hasbro cares about the success of its companies, not individual SKUs put out by that company.
B) NO, 4E could not be selling badly, unless you consider badly to be hundreds of thousands of books, in which case you have no idea about sales in the industry.

[El Mahdi]

Originally Posted by Scribble

Woohoo!!!

I also have to point out the irony of someone going by the name of Orcus working with WoTC to "fix" an "evil" contract...

Brown Jenkin definately won the thread. I think he hit the nail right on the head.

However, I think Scribble absolutely wins the comedy category for the thread. Man, that was funny. Nice!