New GSL Announcement

Orcus · Apr 19, 2008

DaveMage said:
For what it's worth, I don't think anyone will be mad at you...

I dont think anyone should be mad at Wizards either.

Heck, the concept of letting us use their license is to help sell core books. In my view, this restriction--more than any of their other restrictions about content and sexuality and violence--actually aims right at the heart of that key purpose.

Now, dont get me wrong, I would strongly prefer that this clause not exist. But I'm not really in a position to gripe about that. They want to crush out 3E support and drive people to 4E, that's their choice. And I cant say it is a bad one. Others may feel differently. But it makes perfect business sense to me. I didnt see that coming. And I like to be right. So it aggravates me on that level.

But it makes sense. The point of the GSL is to help sell 4E. One way to do that is to close off support for 3E. They cant revoke the OGL/3E SRD, so the only way to accomplish closing down 3E is to do exactly what they are doing. As their attorney, I probably would have advised them to do exactly that.

Clark

Mouseferatu · Apr 19, 2008

I don't think anyone who actually thinks it through should be mad at WotC. This is, frankly, a smart move. They're already letting other companies use their IP and property; why should they do that and still have those companies driving sales/customers to a system that no longer supports WotC itself?

I'm not at all surprised by this restriction.

BryonD · Apr 19, 2008

Orcus said:
I have, however, specifically clarified that Necro can do 4E and Paizo can keep doing 3E Pathfinder stuff and that is just fine.

Is that at least a partial loophole?
If I read it right, a Necro/Paizo partnership could simply result in both doing whatever they want and all the 4E stuff being published by the Necro side and all the 3E stuff being published by the Paizo side. Am I wrong?
What if Necromancer goes pure 4E but Clark Peterson also forms Illusionist Games and Illusionist Games does 3E stuff (completely unrelated to Necromancer products). Is that ok?
(I'm just using you as a 100% hypothetical example).

DaveMage · Apr 19, 2008

Orcus said:
Heck, the concept of letting us use their license is to help sell core books. In my view, this restriction--more than any of their other restrictions about content and sexuality and violence--actually aims right at the heart of that key purpose.

Now, dont get me wrong, I would strongly prefer that this clause not exist. But I'm not really in a position to gripe about that. They want to crush out 3E support and drive people to 4E, that's their choice. And I cant say it is a bad one. Others may feel differently. But it makes perfect business sense to me. I didnt see that coming. And I like to be right. So it aggravates me on that level. But it makes sense. The point of the GSL is to help sell 4E. One way to do that is to close off support for 3E. They cant revoke the OGL/3E SRD, so the only way to accomplish closing down 3E is to do exactly what they are doing. As their attorney, I probably would have advised them to do exactly that.

Clark

Ironically, though, if they allow the 3.5 download, it would actually get me to buy a 4E product.

Orcus · Apr 19, 2008

BryonD said:
If I read it right, a Necro/Paizo partnership could simply result in both doing whatever they want and all the 4E stuff being published by the Necro side and all the 3E stuff being published by the Paizo side. Am I wrong?

Nope you are not wrong. That is correct. And, frankly, that is the plan of what I intend to do.

What if Necromancer goes pure 4E but Clark Peterson also forms Illusionist Games and Illusionist Games does 3E stuff (completely unrelated to Necromancer products). Is that ok?
(I'm just using you as a 100% hypothetical example).

I'd have to see the GSL to answer that. But it certainly seems possible. Hypothetically of course. I have no intent of doing that. We are 4E.

Orcus · Apr 19, 2008

DaveMage said:
Ironically, though, if they allow the 3.5 download, it would actually get me to buy a 4E product.

Yeah, funny, huh?

Believe me, I will do everything in my power to do something. What that will be I dont know.

Lizard · Apr 19, 2008

Mouseferatu said:
I don't think anyone who actually thinks it through should be mad at WotC. This is, frankly, a smart move. They're already letting other companies use their IP and property; why should they do that and still have those companies driving sales/customers to a system that no longer supports WotC itself?

I'm not at all surprised by this restriction.

Well, it means some publishers which are doing well with OGL product (Mongoose, Green Ronin, to name two) will not just drop their successful lines and make 4e products. So their goal of getting the best existing 3x publishers over is weakened by not letting them smoothly transition.

DaveMage · Apr 19, 2008

Mouseferatu said:
I don't think anyone who actually thinks it through should be mad at WotC. This is, frankly, a smart move. They're already letting other companies use their IP and property; why should they do that and still have those companies driving sales/customers to a system that no longer supports WotC itself?

From a business perspective, I certainly agree.

From an RPG fan perspective, I don't. "My way or the highway" doesn't entice me (as a fan/consumer) to go along for the ride. YMMV, of course.

BryonD · Apr 19, 2008

Mouseferatu said:
I don't think anyone who actually thinks it through should be mad at WotC. This is, frankly, a smart move. They're already letting other companies use their IP and property; why should they do that and still have those companies driving sales/customers to a system that no longer supports WotC itself?

I'm not at all surprised by this restriction.

By that thinking they never should have done the OGL in the first place because the OGL allowed spin-offs.

I agree with you completely that they are a business and don't owe anything to anyone.

But first, there is more than ample basis for being a lot less pleased because, as presented so far, they are moving sharply away from being the overall gaming community heroes. The GSL is well better than most everyone else. But it is well less than true Open gaming. So they have moved backward.

But beyond that, this isn't just leaving 3E behind. They can not take back the OGL. But this is a blatant attempt to burn and pillage and salt the fields of the Open Gaming Community. I think it is ok to be mad at that kind of destructive move.

Wicht · Apr 19, 2008

DaveMage said:
From an RPG fan perspective, I don't. "My way or the highway" doesn't entice me (as a fan/consumer) to go along for the ride. YMMV, of course.

I gotta agree. Turns me off as a consumer. Moreover, what it says to me is that they don't feel their new product can compete with their old product and as a discerning consumer, I have to wonder why?