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.
I suspect that the primary intent of the GSL with regards to what they want it to prevent would be roughly as follows:
1) No online and free versions of the rules in their entirety.
- This is in part to protect sales of the core books.
- Wizards wants to sell searchable digital content of this sort.
2) No 3rd party taking any WotC older 3rd edition stuff and converting it to 4th
- I expect that Wizards wants to have the option of revisiting successful 3rd Ed products.
3) No wholesale redefinition of rules
- This is to prevent a break in compatibility, and prevent people trying to cram non D&D stuff into D&D.
4) A reasonable amount of brand protection
- This is just to prevent the PR nightmare of say, thinly disguised racist propaganda from being marketed under the D&D / D20 name.
It sounds to me like they are still working on item 3.
As an aside, I am not surprised much of the digital initiative slipped. The online game table is at least as difficult to implement as a full on computer game. They want a 3d graphic interface with user customizable characters, realtime voice communications, and a means to access a rules database, as well as the dice rolling. On top of that they also need that database to be usable by players who just want to generate and store characters for use in non digital games. Wizards / Hasbro is not a game developer, and it would not surprise me if the people that were hired to implement it were hired on the cheap.
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
Hey I was waiting for a reply to my post so I could say something to the effect of what you just said more eloquently and concise than I could have put it. =P
So, yeah. That was my point as well. So many people are blinded by the brand and conditioned by society to buy the brand name for whatever reason that it matters little what an off brand does.
Some will always buy the brand name, and others will always buy the product they feel has better quality.
So many people are blinded by the brand and conditioned by society to buy the brand name for whatever reason that it matters little what an off brand does.
Heh. Way to be dismissive of whole swaths of people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanobody
Some will always buy the brand name, and others will always buy the product they feel has better quality.
And some will realize that both have their advantages in certain situations, and don't "blindly" follow one or the other.
And of course, nothing prevents a brand name from being high quality as well. Assuming that brand name = low quality is invalid.
__________________ 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
I wasn't dismissive of them, I acknowledged their existence.
Yes, and you called them brainwashed sheep, essentially. That's fairly dismissive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanobody
If you buy the brand because it is the superior product, or better quality product then you fit within the given statement.
That's not what I was saying. I was saying that sometimes, brand has advantages over higher quality, and vice-versa. So that sometimes, buying a brand name even though you know it to be lower quality can be a legitimate decision, and not the mark of a brainwashed sheep.
Quote:
Originally Posted by justanobody
I think you are arguing to argue.
And that's dismissive of me now. Keep it up! You're doing great!
__________________ 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
My meger company supports Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved
I would love to one day let one of our writers do a 4E if they wished too, but alas that will never happen with GSL until it is changed for the better.
Mr. Ryan brings up a very good point and one I remember from the seminar about it, WotC wants a bar to enter to stop a glut of bad products from damaging the brand, I personally think that is like trying to fight the last war.
However, Nothing would have stopped a "certain company" that thank heavens is no longer in bussiness from publishing a great deal of bad material even if the GSL had been in place as is, because even when they made mistakes they refused to acknowledge the mistakes and never corrected them.
Other much better than that publisher produced better products (take Creature Collection I and compare it to Creature Colleciton III), but sold less copies becuase of competition and because of the readers who got burned on bad products from places like this "certain company".
Here is the think about Open Source, the best products need to become "Official" and be recognized as "Official" this will bring greater support to the market, as the best products are recognized by the only "Official" authority on DnD.
An Example of this would be the 3.5 version of Unearthed Arcana, however IMHO, the authors should never have been allowed to promote thier own material the best of the industry should have been culled by editors and then presented in a single book, and added to the "Official D&D"
In this manner WotC reaps the rewards of other people hard work, who reaped it from WotC's hard work. You can very rarely stop crappy products if your not going to police content which is very expensive and something WotC is never going to want to do. You can however recognize and reward quality which encourages others to strive for the same.
I have seen Neverwinter Nights I do this with thier open sources as has Warcraft III. WotC has always failed to prop up 3PP for excellent work in support of D&D.
Sorry if that was Rantish
I hope to see the new GSL and I hope the changes are all positive ones.
5th are you capable of saying that no one on this planet is blinded by branding things and that society has not conditioned anyone to buy brand names?
I am not dismissing anyone. I agree that they exist and are a problem in the business world. The problem being they drive it therefore the quality of products is lessened by those who just buy brand names over a higher quality product.
It is in part vanity, and in part conditioning. Keeping up with the Jones' as well that started at least in the 50's if not much before and just became widespread in the 50's.
You don't need an X just because your neighbor needs an X, but society today does so. Look at many car commercials and other advertisements. People are being taught to act in this manner.
If you are constantly buying the brand for brands sake, then you are buying the brand only if you don't give something else a look or chance to see if it is better than Brand X.
This is why blind studies or product tests are made to see why is superior or not. But the tests really prove nothing, because it will never be unanimous and each person flaws the results because quality is subjective to the individual.
I think that recent announcement of the new mini distribution model is kind of the nail in the coffin for a good GSL. If WOTC is moving to a mini/card format for products any GSL that comes out has its days numbered from the start.
I don't see Hasbro letting another company produce power cards or minis for its game.
Some will always buy the brand name, and others will always buy the product they feel has better quality.
You know what's funny? You've just said the same thing twice.
If you "feel [that product X] has better quality," then you are reacting to its brand attributes. You have made a judgement about the product that will colour your buying decision. If you've used a widget and were happy with its performance or value, you're going to consider buying that widget again. Or a something from the same company, if you need a different widget. That's what brands are all about.
Unless you conduct blind, scientific lab studies of the widget's "quality," you'll decide that quality based on experience, recommendations, reviews, packaging text, ads, and so on. All of these things create an impression of the widget in your mind; a relationship between you and the widget. That's what the brand is!
The dark side of branding is when the mythical aspects of the relationship overshadow everything else--they slap a designer logo on some otherwise mediocre widget, and people willingly pay through the nose for it.
But light side is when the brand tells you something. You can make a widget decision because the widget's brand gives you information. When I drive my family across the US, and I see an Applebee's sign at the next exit, I know something. They serve food (not just booze). They have high chairs and kids are welcome. There will be bathrooms, and they'll probably be clean, and they'll have a changing station. I have some idea of what I'll see on the menu.
In contrast, when I drive my family around the UK, and I see a village pub, I know nothing. Do they serve food, and if so, when? Can my kids come in and can I change the nappy? Will I like what they have? Should I even bother stopping? In a random UK pub, the only way to know these things is to stop, go in, and ask.
So, the Applebee's brand--the brand alone--offers me value by helping me decide whether to stop. Setting aside anything you like or don't like about Applebee's, the brand alone offers you something.
Perhaps this conditions some people toward the dark side; perhaps a few too many people accept brand glamour over more substantive qualities. But we live in a frenetic, confusing world, and not everyone has time to conduct blind, scientific lab studies of every available widget option. (Or to stop at every random pub till you find one that's child-friendly.) Relying on your past experiences with a brand to guide your decisions isn't always as contemptible as it might seem.
You know what's funny? You've just said the same thing twice.
Not quite.
Some people buy brand name because, while they know it is not the best quality, they also know what quality to expect. A brand name is often a sort of sure thing, whereas an unknown is a gamble.
A great many people buy McDonalds, for example, not because they believe McDonalds is the best burger, but because they always know what they're going to get.
I suppose if you rolled "value of knowing what the product will be" into the quality of the product itself, then you could say it is the same thing, but I'm fairly certain that that changes the meanings of the terms from those justanobody is using.
There are huge budgets allocated to name-brand recognition, and the whole point of trademark law is to prevent others from profitting by your expenditure on name-brand recognition. Saying that this advertising works is not, IMHO, dismissive of anyone. If anything can be proven with statistics, I would accept that "name-brand recognition affects buying patterns" is high on the list of things that have been so proven.
After all, buying on the basis of brand isn't irrational. There are good, logical, reasons to do so. However, doing so doesn't guarantee that you've purchased the best possible product, either.
(All of which has little to do with when the GSL is coming out, except to speak to the question of why WotC decided to go GSL over OGL in the first place. It still seems to be an attempt to close the barn door after the cows have already escaped to me.)
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.
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.
Sometimes the brand brings along with it a higher quality to a product because that product is an addition to a suite of products.
In other words, if the product works with others in the brand, the quality of the previous suite of products in the brand can enhance the quality of the new product. Or shred it.
I think that recent announcement of the new mini distribution model is kind of the nail in the coffin for a good GSL. If WOTC is moving to a mini/card format for products any GSL that comes out has its days numbered from the start.
I don't see Hasbro letting another company produce power cards or minis for its game.
That's a nice jump you just made there...
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
You'd sooner go to an applebees then a british pub, in britain?
EDIT: you being Charles Ryan, in this case.
Well me not being Charles Ryan, I can answer that anyway with: it depends. If you are traveling with children, then going to a chain restaurant is a great idea anywhere in the world. For me, when I am out of the country I love trying local food, but McDonalds is always one of the places I go.
You know what you're getting there, and also you know that they have a clean bathroom of a western nature. And yes, that last one can be an issue, even in England!
But I do loves me my pub food, so as I usually travel solo and single overseas, bring on the beer and meat pies!
Sorry for the distract: but it does go to show that the decision on what "brand" to make use of is more complicated than you might think.
--Steve
__________________ Be a rebel...order your coffee in one of these three radical sizes: small, medium or large.
"Sure as I know anything, I know this. I aim to misbehave."
--Capt. Malcolm Reynolds, Serenity
I play 4E, and it's every bit as much Dungeons and Dragons as any other edition, including the one(s) you play. No more, and no less.
Sorry for the distract: but it does go to show that the decision on what "brand" to make use of is more complicated than you might think.
This was basically my point. Differing brands have differing advantages in differing situations. To say one is "higher quality" in all situations is generally misleading.
__________________ 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
Some people buy brand name because, while they know it is not the best quality, they also know what quality to expect. A brand name is often a sort of sure thing, whereas an unknown is a gamble.
A great many people buy McDonalds, for example, not because they believe McDonalds is the best burger, but because they always know what they're going to get.
I suppose if you rolled "value of knowing what the product will be" into the quality of the product itself, then you could say it is the same thing, but I'm fairly certain that that changes the meanings of the terms from those justanobody is using.
You'd sooner go to an applebees then a british pub, in britain?
SteveC already gave a pretty good answer to this.
I'll just add that if all British pubs really were what you imagine them to be (as implicit in your post--if nothing else, superior to Applebees), the answer would be Heck No.
This sort of illustrates my point (albiet perhaps weakly). Based on how you put your question, I'm guessing you have an image in your mind of The British Pub. It seems like it might be a favourable image--a comfortable, welcoming place, characterized by old world charm and a neighborly camaraderie. In this sense, The British Pub is in effect a brand, to which you have a relationship. Given the chance, this image--this brand--might affect your restaurant-patronization choices should The British Pub be an option for you.
In reality, some British pubs are like the above. Others are beer-soaked sports bars. Some don't serve food at all. The "British pub" spans a range of experiences equivalent to almost every form of bar and mom-and-pop restaurant in the US. Actually, some British pubs are in fact chain restaurants.
I prefer the food and experience at The Selbourn Arms and The White Horse many times over that at Applebee's. But eating at The Selbourn Arms tells me absolutely nothing about the pub in the village in Dorset that I happen to be driving through with two hungry children. Whereas the Applebee's logo tells me everything I need to know!
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.]
Copy and paste publishing created a glut IYO?
Most d20 products IME did not paste material from the srd directly into their products. Just ones that tried to be complete in themselves games that wanted full d20 rules (Arcana Evolved, Conan RPG, Thrilling Tales, and such) or more convenient srds (or pocket PH/DMG/MM guides).
These copy and paste products did not seem a large portion of the d20 product market and banning their creation would not have significantly affected the number of d20 products IMO.
d20 never had a useful short stat block in the srd for monsters or NPCs that could be copied into a module or sourcebook. These had to be created by the new product authors.
Even looking at huge 700 page d20 books like Ptolus or Rappan Athuk or Castle White Rock or World's Largest Dungeon, I'm not sure what you could find that was pasted into them directly from the srd.
Most products simply used srd mechanics names but had to type in the whole stat blocks of everything themselves. This would still be allowed under the GSL. All that is really blocked by eliminating copy and paste publishing are the full stand alone games and reformatted srds.
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
