D&D 4E Rumor control: Lucca 4e seminar report inaccuracies

buzz · Nov 8, 2007

JohnSnow said:
Heck, Scott, if you're still here, is there any reason WotC couldn't create one for use by anyone using the OGL?

I'd think this would be effectively the same as the d20STL, i.e., a logo provided by WotC that indicates compatibility and implies some sort of approval on WotC's part. Obviously, they don't want to go down that path again.

buzz · Nov 8, 2007

Mouseferatu said:
People can discuss and argue the logic all they like, but the truth is, this has already been tried (after the D20 Logo stopped meaning what people wanted it to mean), and it's proven impossible for all intents and purposes. If WotC chooses not to hand down a "D20 Logo" (or its equivalent) from on-high, then for all practical purposes, there will never be one that means anything.

But there can still be brands that mean something. E.g., Paizo has a little OGL logo they use now for Pathfinder, but it's really moot. Paizo has established itself as a source for D&D-compatible product. Same as Goodman, mentioned above, and a few others.

Basically, it'll be back to business as usual. How do you make consumers aware of the compatibility of your product? You develop and advertise your brand identity.

Heck, publishers are practically in that boat now, given how superfluous the d20 logo has become. (That's my impression, at least.)

JohnSnow · Nov 8, 2007

buzz said:
I'd think this would be effectively the same as the d20STL, i.e., a logo provided by WotC that indicates compatibility and implies some sort of approval on WotC's part. Obviously, they don't want to go down that path again.

But WotC used the d20 logo on its OWN products. I'm talking about something that WotC might use, secondarily, but one that just says "OGL."

If they reserve "d20" for their own non-D&D products, but provide a logo that goes along with the OGL that can fit on the spine of a book, all that means is customers don't have to pull a gaming book off the shelf (or worse, open and and read the damn thing) just to find out whether it's OGL or not.

The D&D & d20 logos already do that for WotC products. As a consumer, I'm just saying it'd be nice to have something similar for third party stuff.

buzz · Nov 8, 2007

JohnSnow said:
As a consumer, I'm just saying it'd be nice to have something similar for third party stuff.

Oh, I gotcha. I'm just assuming that, were the logo to come from WotC as "official," even if they didn't use it on their own products, it will be effectively indistinguishable from the current d20 logo in the perception of the market.

E.g., "Hey! This horrible product, The Book of Fantasy [EXPLETIVE] with Chainsaws and [EXPLETIVE] [EXPLETIVE], has the logo that you, WotC, provide for all your 'official' supplements, right? BAM! Lawsuit!"

BadMojo · Nov 8, 2007

buzz said:
Basically, it'll be back to business as usual. How do you make consumers aware of the compatibility of your product? You develop and advertise your brand identity.

Smaller companies that aren't Goodman, Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. probably don't have the resources for that but a brand created by several D20 companies could do it. If only the paranoid, egotistical cats could stop wandering off to chase a particularly tasty looking squirrel.

Maybe the gravity of the situation, especially if the "compatible with..." wording falls through will lead to some cooperation among the various cats.

GMSkarka · Nov 8, 2007

BadMojo said:
Smaller companies that aren't Goodman, Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. probably don't have the resources for that

Not true. Anybody can successfully brand their products. Most just don't know how.

I devoted the very first issue of ePublishing 101 to the subject.

It really doesn't require a lot of money. It *does* require thought, planning and hard work.

BadMojo · Nov 8, 2007

GMSkarka said:
Not true. Anybody can successfully brand their products. Most just don't know how.

I devoted the very first issue of ePublishing 101 to the subject.

Hi Gareth. I've been meaning to check those out for a while now. You've certainly done a good job with Adamant. I'll be a little less poor this Friday; should make for interesting Friday night reading.

Crashy75 · Nov 9, 2007

Scott_Rouse said:
...
2) core rule book sequels will not be updates (mistake corrections) to previously released versions. These will be similar to the PHB to PHBII, DMG to DMGII, or MM to MMx. The game will still require use of the three core rule books (PHB, DMG, MM) and follow up titles will introduce new classes, DM options, and monsters respectively.

THANK YOU! This makes me very happy!

Michael Morris · Nov 9, 2007

Wulf Ratbane said:
It's like herding artistic, creative, egotistical, controlling, and frequently flat-out paranoid cats.

But I repeat myself.

But worth a shot. How's this?

Kahuna Burger · Nov 9, 2007

Michael Morris said:
But worth a shot. How's this?

Straightforward yet stylistic. I could spot that in the corner of a book and know what it was for. 3 stars.

Just to clarify, my comment was made to build on the one I responded to - that a logo indicating a compatible supplement type product was nice for consumers, and the d20 logo had moved away from that, reducing it's value. (what with d20 modern, BESM d20, Call of Cthuhlu d20 and other stand alone systems that happened to use the same base mechanics.) My suggestion was of a logo that was clearly about compatibility / supplementing D&D games and wouldn't end up on products that did nothing for your fantasy game. As for getting everyone to accept or use it... Obviously such a logo introduced by WotC as they did d20 would be easiest, but they would fear another dilution uselessless cycle. Hence my suggestion that such a logo be slightly less abstract in it's message.

D&D 4E Rumor control: Lucca 4e seminar report inaccuracies

buzz

Adventurer

buzz

Adventurer

JohnSnow

Hero

buzz

Adventurer

BadMojo

First Post

GMSkarka

Explorer

BadMojo

First Post

Crashy75

First Post

Michael Morris

First Post

Attachments

Kahuna Burger

First Post

Similar Threads