You reap what you sow - GSL.

MerricB · Jun 18, 2008

There are many things in the GSL that I'm not exactly happy about, the primarily one being how you cannot reprint statblocks from the Monster Manual, which will have horrible implications on the presentation of adventures.

However, when it comes to the lack of "reuse" clauses for 3rd party publishers, I think they've got it right. This is pretty much how a lot of publishers - including some well-regarded ones - regarded the "Open" part of the OGL: Not for their products. Let's release "Crippled" OGC.

There have been exceptions, with Clark Peterson and his Tome of Horrors being the most shining star in that constellation.

For the purposes of this license, however, it seems to be the case that a large part of the OGL "community" has reaped what it has sown.

Cheers!

Ralts Bloodthorne · Jun 18, 2008

MerricB said:
There are many things in the GSL that I'm not exactly happy about, the primarily one being how you cannot reprint statblocks from the Monster Manual, which will have horrible implications on the presentation of adventures.

However, when it comes to the lack of "reuse" clauses for 3rd party publishers, I think they've got it right. This is pretty much how a lot of publishers - including some well-regarded ones - regarded the "Open" part of the OGL: Not for their products. Let's release "Crippled" OGC.

There have been exceptions, with Clark Peterson and his Tome of Horrors being the most shining star in that constellation.

For the purposes of this license, however, it seems to be the case that the majority of the OGL "community" has reaped what it has sown.

Cheers!

I don't agree with this. When I was writing, most authors of works had no problems with me reprinting things from their products. The main ones being RPGObjects, Green Ronin, The Game Mechanics, but many fantasy ones, like ENPublishing, and others, were very free with their content.

"Crippled Content" always seemed more "Ask me first, it's polite" than forbidding anyone from using their content. I've NEVER been turned down.

Olaf the Stout · Jun 18, 2008

I think the biggest issue with the GSL is that if WotC publish something on a topic 3 months after a 3rd party publisher has released a similar, they can force them to stop selling that book. At least that is how I read it. If that is correct then it sucks.

Olaf the Stout

Khuxan · Jun 18, 2008

MerricB said:
For the purposes of this license, however, it seems to be the case that the majority of the OGL "community" has reaped what it has sown.

I think that's very astute. I wouldn't say "the majority" of publishers did this, but I know of several high-profile companies that did.

MerricB · Jun 18, 2008

Olaf the Stout said:
I think the biggest issue with the GSL is that if WotC publish something on a topic 3 months after a 3rd party publisher has released a similar, they can force them to stop selling that book. At least that is how I read it. If that is correct then it sucks.

Olaf the Stout

I agree. From the point of view of what I want (adventures), I really hate that stat blocks have problems being reprinted.

From the point of view of actually *using* the GSL, I'm very worried about what happens in the case you mention.

Cheers!

MerricB · Jun 18, 2008

Khuxan said:
I think that's very astute. I wouldn't say "the majority" of publishers did this, but I know of several high-profile companies that did.

I've changed the wording. I was trying to avoid "majority" and terms like that, too!

Cheers!

Ralts Bloodthorne · Jun 18, 2008

MerricB said:
I've changed the wording. I was trying to avoid "majority" and terms like that, too!

Cheers!

So what publishers kept who from using what?

Seriously, I'd like to hear this. I've spent quite a bit of time offline and away from the gaming scene and from writing, so I'd really like to hear about who asked which company for what and was denied.

Has anyone ACTUALLY been denied?

Mercule · Jun 18, 2008

Mongoose's "Pocket Player's Handbook" is the cardinal example of the sowing, IMO. The simple existence of that book is pretty much a slap in WotC's face. It's insulting and shows a company that is crass and disrespectful.

I don't get many 3rd party supplements, and generally regard Mongoose as one of the lowest quality, anyway. But, publishing that book pretty well sealed that there's no way I'd buy anything from the company.

When publishers are pulling crap like that, I can't blame WotC for thinking the OGL was a bad idea. If there are people who are more irritated at WotC for the GSL than at Mongoose for the PPH, then.... hmm.... I'm afraid the site rules prohibit the completion of my sentence. How about: I think they have their perspective out of whack.

Whizbang Dustyboots · Jun 18, 2008

Olaf the Stout said:
I think the biggest issue with the GSL is that if WotC publish something on a topic 3 months after a 3rd party publisher has released a similar, they can force them to stop selling that book. At least that is how I read it. If that is correct then it sucks.

Pretty sure that's not how it's going to work.

Darrin Drader · Jun 18, 2008

Olaf the Stout said:
I think the biggest issue with the GSL is that if WotC publish something on a topic 3 months after a 3rd party publisher has released a similar, they can force them to stop selling that book. At least that is how I read it. If that is correct then it sucks.

Olaf the Stout

While there's a potential risk of this happening, I don't think it's very likely, to be honest. WotC usually looks at big picture kind of problems, and unless something changes in the near future, 3rd party publishing isn't really a big picture kind of problem for them.

Now, let's say hypothetically, that one of the larger 3rd party publishers decides to go all out by guessing what WotC has coming down the pike for the next year or so, creates full color books intentionally designed to precede those books, hires on some big name talent (like myself

) and markets the heck out of those products, like say, placing an ad in GQ or Popular Mechanics, then I can see where they might get a little concerned.

In other words, if niche publishers remain niche, then I think they're safe. If someone comes along with the intention of knocking WotC off their pedestal, then they may have reason to fear.

That said, I'm pretty happy that Pathfinder will be keeping 3.x around for some time to come. Its nice having someone supporting a version of the game that cannot be summarily revoked.