General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
This situation reminds me a bit of a scene from my last full-time games programming job:
Me: "I think it would really help the company if we did X. Can I get time to do X?"
Boss: "Absolutely! Feel free to come in on any Saturdays and work on X."
Me: "???"
Needless to say, X did not get done.
__________________ ADVANCED DUNGEONS &DRAGONS is first and foremost a game for the fun and enjoyment of those who seek to use imagination and creativity. This is not to say that where it does not interfere with the flow of the game that the highest degree of realism hasn‘t been attempted, but neither is a serious approach to play discouraged. (1E DMG p. 9)
And certainly WotC has met most deadlines on products, with the exception of the online material. As to the completeness, it depends on what you mean, but as a shareholder, I'd think you'd be glad that the company was giving itself a way to make more products.
That 'exception' is a pretty freaking huge one. When you have been trumpeting it left and right since 4e was announced and its in the back of the freaking books and its NOT ready at release time.....thats a pretty big screw up.
You based the business plan around 4e and online play. And online isnt ready.
The fansite policy is not my bailiwick anymore. We will be consulted to make sure that the proposal meets Brand's vision for the fansites but the actual implementation is being handled by someone in our web studio.
When it was in our court we had a pretty good overall policy but it tried to serve all the WOTC brands and this didn't necessarily address our specific needs. So we are using that draft plan as a base and will tailor it to suit D&Ds specific needs.
*grumble, grumble* I'd feel better if it were in your bailiwick, except that would probably delay both.
I do hope the web dudes know that the ability to tinker is part of the value of D&D for many of us, and the spillage from our creative juices lubes the market for more experimental product penetration.
Uh... I'm going to stop typing now.
, -- N
__________________
Brevity is the soul of wit, so trim your sig or look dumb.
That 'exception' is a pretty freaking huge one. When you have been trumpeting it left and right since 4e was announced and its in the back of the freaking books and its NOT ready at release time.....thats a pretty big screw up.
You based the business plan around 4e and online play. And online isnt ready.
I'd be shocked if the RPG division of WotC expected more than 10% of 4e profits to be based around DDI. Its a major problem, but certainly not company ending.
__________________ All we want to do is eat your brains
We’re not unreasonable; I mean, no one’s gonna eat your eyes
All we want to do is eat your brains
We’re at an impasse here; maybe we should compromise:
If you open up the doors
We’ll all come inside and eat your brains
Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.
As an example:
Maybe in your campaign world dragonborn live underground. Does this redefine dragonborn? Probably not. What if they also get darkvison? OK. What if they have albinio skin and can walk through solid stone once per day? Well not this likely crosses a line, but then again maybe not.
(Additional text omitted.)
First, I think this would work out better if the term "redefine" was avoided. That word has a very basic meaning, and I think that established meaning is interfering with your desire to place concise allowances and restrictions on how you want your property to be used.
For one, I think you will run into problems with words that already have an estabilished meaning. "Troll" is a common word with several definitions. If I use "troll" as a referent to a set of statistics and to a game world description, have I "redefined" the word "troll"? (My professional mathematics training says, very definitely, no.) You get into a second level problem, too, in that I don't think that you really mean to say "redefine". I would gather that that is not a legal term, so we are left with the common English one ... and I am thinking that under that meaning "Dragonborn" are simply "humanoid creatures with draconic characteristics", and anything else is fair game for revision. (Or most everything else -- I would think that the definition could have a line or two more.)
Second, I think there are two issues which are being mixed up. One is establishing new referents to existing words. That is, "In my campaign, Dragonborn have these characteristics ...". The second is to create new words for existing characteristics. "In my campaign, Scions of Tiamat have these characteristics ... " followed by a reproduction of the statistics for Dragonborn.
Third, can a exemplar be created for the use of the license? That is, hire an author to create a sample work that uses the license, to show how the license is intended to be used. (If there is a problem with creating such a work and its probably use as precedent in any legal issues ... then I would have to ask you to take a look back at what the license is trying to achieve.)
Thx for having the bandwidth to contribute to these forums. My view that to have the allowance to make statements here is pretty big Mojo for the the corporate world.
You get into a second level problem, too, in that I don't think that you really mean to say "redefine". I would gather that that is not a legal term, so we are left with the common English one ... and I am thinking that under that meaning "Dragonborn" are simply "humanoid creatures with draconic characteristics", and anything else is fair game for revision. (Or most everything else -- I would think that the definition could have a line or two more.)
Actually, they very definitely mean redefine. You are just using the wrong example. They don't care if you change dragonborn into Smurfs*. If you can sell that, go for it.
What they don't want is a 4e equivalent to Mutants and Masterminds. Thus they don't want terms like AC, hit points, attack, class, level, etc redefined. The problem is redefinition is only half the problem. They also do not want these terms circumvented. "This characteristic (which is amazingly similar to AC) is called Defense...."
Of course, I think Kamakaze Midget's analysis spot on. They don't want someone building a better DDI and these are the hoops they need to jump through (and lead the 4e pubs through) in order to protect it.
--
* Peyo might care.
__________________ Joe Mucchiello, Head Honcho at Throwing Dice Games
Priority One: Fatherhood.
Priority Two: Sanity.
Down on the list: seemingly real close to releasing a notebook essential. It's in layout! Has been for months now. (Just nod politely so I won't cry about this.)
"I've never heard of the term Flavor lawyer..." -- Scribble
If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.
Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.
Sigh. Copy and paste publishing was really useful to me as a DM and player. www.d20srd was easier to use (for the stuff in the srd) than the WotC rtfs or my books in my online games. We all have/had varying levels of D&D books but the copy and paste online stuff was used as a reference tool more often.
But now no srd.com for 4e, no free 4e WotC srd, and it is not clear what publishers and authors can actually do and not do under the GSL.
This is to prevent what? Online srds that compete with DDI? Pocket srd books that compete with actual core books? Mutant and Masterminds style variant games that don't require D&D books to use?
I think the ambiguities are one good area to revise in an effort to improve the GSL but I wish the underlying goal of avoiding copy and paste publishing were eliminated and all the resulting limitations that resulted from trying to accomplish it.
First: Scott/The thanks for updating and continuing to push this boulder!
Second: it does seem like this approach has become the case of the perfect crushing the good enough.
Seems like they just need four rules:
-Don't use our names of places and persons
-Clearly indicate what you modify, and rename or label it ("Midnight Elves")
-Don't copy whole text blocks, with maybe a few exceptions (monster stat blocks, up to some kind of limit)
-Remember, what you take from us is our IP.
4E has rituals, use them, they're magic; Want to see the greatest thing you will ever see? then click; You can use “Earth” as a D&D setting; Origins of The Rouse; (look for it) The Rouse responds; (look for it) One can appreciate both old and new D&D.
I wish the underlying goal of avoiding copy and paste publishing were eliminated and all the resulting limitations that resulted from trying to accomplish it.
Indeed. It is telling that the 3.x SRD was intended to increase what is essentially "cut & paste" publishing under the belief that this would actually increase WotC's profits in the long term.
The most recent writer's digest actually has an article on how giving away materials for free can help a business increase its sales over the long term. This is one of the reasons that you get free electronic books and audio podcasts of novels.....the readers tend to want hardcopy books as well.
I know a lot of folks who have made use of the SRD (including myself, both the WotC version and the Hypertext SRD). In each of these cases, the person also bought physical copies of the books.
While I am sure that the 3.5 SRD in particular cost WotC money, I think that this is more because WotC failed to convince a certain segment of the gaming population that either (1) they needed to convert, or (2) their 3.0 books didn't effectively function as hardcopy for 3.5, or (3) both.
IMHO, that Conan, Iron Heroes, or Arcana Unearthed uses largely the same "engine" as 3.x is a good thing. It means that I can steal from those games to make my D&D game stronger. It means that I can buy & adapt D&D modules and run them in other systems. All roads lead to D&D, and it is the quality of WotC products that largely determines which WotC products I am willing to buy.
The absence of an SRD/game crossover hurts the value I receive from buying a 4e product.
If the official game is a game I want to play, there is no doubt that being "official" is going to boost that game to the top of the heap. If, OTOH, WotC is losing significant money to "non-official" games, perhaps that is because those games are offering something WotC is not? The same holds true for suppliments, etc. "Official" is automatically better unless there is an overwhelming reason why it is not, and if that overwhelming reason exists, then it would only be an asset to WotC to find out what it is.
The genie is already out of the bottle, from 3e. The market is already fragmented. An OGL 4e would ameliorate that fragmentation to the highest possible degree. Continuing down this road will only increase fragmentation over time.
IMHO, of course.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
If the official game is a game I want to play, there is no doubt that being "official" is going to boost that game to the top of the heap. If, OTOH, WotC is losing significant money to "non-official" games, perhaps that is because those games are offering something WotC is not? The same holds true for suppliments, etc. "Official" is automatically better unless there is an overwhelming reason why it is not, and if that overwhelming reason exists, then it would only be an asset to WotC to find out what it is.
So true. Superior product will win my money every time.
Why would I buy the McRibs after I found the patties half-a-dozen for $3 the same price as a McRib? Take it takes 3 to make a meal for me, then for that $9 I can purchase the rest of the buns, pickles, BBQ sauce for under that $9 and have twice the meals and get the same or maybe better taste from it.
So having the "Mc" or not becomes moot when I can find a better/equal product cheaper. If McDonald's want my money again they will have to pull off something like 10 hamburgers for $1 so it is worth my money in this failing economy. Doubtful they can do that with McRibs.
If "Official" wants the money, then they need to offer the best product, just like everyone else.
Why would I buy the McRibs after I found the patties half-a-dozen for $3 the same price as a McRib? Take it takes 3 to make a meal for me, then for that $9 I can purchase the rest of the buns, pickles, BBQ sauce for under that $9 and have twice the meals and get the same or maybe better taste from it.
You've missed the point of restaurants, especially fast-food restaurants. That is, you don't have to prepare the food yourself (saving time and effort), you don't have to clean up (again saving time and effort), etc. That's valuable to many people.
It's a poor example.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
You've missed the point of restaurants, especially fast-food restaurants. That is, you don't have to prepare the food yourself (saving time and effort), you don't have to clean up (again saving time and effort), etc. That's valuable to many people.
It's a poor example.
Well the local McDonalds to me sure don't clean up either....
Let us translate that to a superior RPG product then. You don't have to fix typos, guess errata, etc in a non-official product that costs less.
The concept of fast-food was also lost in the fact that now even fixing and cooking yourself takes less time than ordering in most of them.
Sometimes brand can be good. Say you want to take a bunch of people to a restaurant. It's usually easier to find a place you'll all enjoy (or at least are willing to try) if it's a place familiar to everyone.
__________________ Iain Fyffe
Original member of the Rouseketeers!
I have played 4E. And just like all other editions of D&D, it is awesome!
no one quotes me in sigs - Crothian
For some reason, this doesn't fill me with rage. I must be interwebbing wrong. - Cadfan
Sometimes brand can be good. Say you want to take a bunch of people to a restaurant. It's usually easier to find a place you'll all enjoy (or at least are willing to try) if it's a place familiar to everyone.
That has little to do with brand, and more to do with quality.
Personally, trying to avoid "copy & paste publishing," while an admirable goal on the surface, seems to be more trouble than it's worth.
I mean, where's the competition, here? There were a few 3e products that did the copy-and-paste thing extensively, but they either did very new things as well (like Arcana Unearthed), or were mere format shifts (the Pocket SRD), both of which weren't products anyone at Wizards seemed to have much of an interest in making. They filled a void, and I'd be more than a little surprised to hear the people who bought those products not already owning a PHB/DMG/MM or at least using the online SRD extensively.
My guess is that it's not a competition issue. It's an issue of barriers to entry. In the "copy & paste publishing" scenario, anyone with a little time, a few thousand bucks, and a desire to be a game publisher can flood the hobby game channel with poorly-selling product that chokes the profit out of the RPG category. That was very much the state of the industry circa 2005.
Eliminate that, and create a scenario in which every single word of a 65,000-word sourcebook must be original, and you create a barrier to entry that will restrict the volume of new product entering the RPG marketplace--hopefully a restriction that favours product more likely to sell.
[Is this the end-all-and-be-all solution for avoiding a glut? Hardly. But I bet a lot of decisions about the GSL are being made with glut-avoidance in mind.]
So true. Superior product will win my money every time.
Why would I buy the McRibs after I found the patties half-a-dozen for $3 the same price as a McRib? Take it takes 3 to make a meal for me, then for that $9 I can purchase the rest of the buns, pickles, BBQ sauce for under that $9 and have twice the meals and get the same or maybe better taste from it.
So having the "Mc" or not becomes moot when I can find a better/equal product cheaper. If McDonald's want my money again they will have to pull off something like 10 hamburgers for $1 so it is worth my money in this failing economy. Doubtful they can do that with McRibs.
If "Official" wants the money, then they need to offer the best product, just like everyone else.
[/sidetrek]
That, unfortunately, makes you an exception. Millions of people worldwide will still happily eat the McRibs without a second thought. You can try to eductae them on superior, cheaper food every day for the rest of your life, and yet McDonalds will still continue to sell McRibs to droves of eager customers.
Your $9 simply does not matter when millions of other people are gladly paying it.
That, unfortunately, makes you an exception. Millions of people worldwide will still happily eat the McRibs without a second thought. You can try to eductae them on superior, cheaper food every day for the rest of your life, and yet McDonalds will still continue to sell McRibs to droves of eager customers.
Your $9 simply does not matter when millions of other people are gladly paying it.
People are paying for the conveinience of near instant satisfaction. That is why it is called "fast food".
McRibs is a horrible example from my POV... you couldn't pay me to eat that (nor the homemade equivalent)
__________________ Erik
"Because the gods say so, and don't like pointy eared types with curly-toed shoes, squat miners with big beards, hairy-footed midgets, etc." - EGG
Tenkar's Tavern Exploring the world of VTTs, PDFs, Gaming Related Applications and more
That, unfortunately, makes you an exception. Millions of people worldwide will still happily eat the McRibs without a second thought. You can try to eductae them on superior, cheaper food every day for the rest of your life, and yet McDonalds will still continue to sell McRibs to droves of eager customers.
Your $9 simply does not matter when millions of other people are gladly paying it.
Which also goes to show that the vast majority of people will buy D&D because of brand recognition, even if the edition turns out to be a McRib. So what, then, is the point of preventing Cut & Paste publishing, esp. given the general notion that "It's kinda like D&D" eventually gets people to try D&D?
I would love a good answer to that question.
It seems to me as though WotC is jumping through hoops to try to prevent something that doesn't actually harm the "900-lb gorilla" of name-brand recognition, but their attempts to prevent it harm both 3pp that would support them and the customers that would buy their products.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
, -- N
4E has rituals, use them, they're magic;
Want to see the greatest thing you will ever see? then 
You can use “Earth” as a D&D 
The Rouse 
One can appreciate both old and new D&D.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
