It's been a few weeks since last I read something about it's progress.
Any word on the GSL?
I want to second this request. Scott, where we at? We understand weather and holidays got in the way with the end of the year release of the GSL. But now we are at Jan 19th here, and last I remember you said we would have something in the first part of Jan.
Please just give us an update at least.
thanks
Nate
Please just give us an update at least.
thanks
Nate
Brown Jenkin
First Post
Well it was 1 week from being done before Gen Con and 2 days from being done before Christmas, so I figure it might be done by the GAMA Trade Show in April.
Relique du Madde
Adventurer
I didn't think 4.5e would be announced so that soon..*
*I have a long standing fool's bet that GSL would be released when 4.5e or 5e would be announced.
Lord Xtheth
First Post
I think they have thier bases covered on the 4.5 issue. With PHB and DMG sequils, they can fix all their mistakes while not making a new edition. That way they can write up 5th ed by 2020
Personally, regardless of when/if it's revised, I think that ship has sailed. Given the initial delay/limbo, the larger companies needed to keep products moving to run the business. The lack of advances on the rules and the uncertainty surrounding the license effectively forced all but Goodman to move in directions that didn't rely on 4e or the GSL. The change from OGL to GSL and its much more restrictive nature only solidified their decisions.
WotC has no financial interest in modifying the GSL. It may help from a market perception perspective but I strongly suspect that 4e is successful enough that the legacy idea behind the OGL that 3rd-party product would drive more WotC content is considered insignificant. On the rare chance 4e is not as successful as hoped, it would be a foolish business plan for WotC to bank on a friendlier GSL driving 3rd-party product and in turn, driving WotC sales.
Even if we see an updated GSL, I don't think publishers will be lining up around the corner like with 3e.
Also, if I look into my dollar-store crystal ball, I also wouldn't be surprised that when 5e is announced it's closed. I also see the lack of 3rd-party participation in 4e being held up as a reason for not having any kind of OGL/GSL aside from perhaps a specific license for writing adventures. Hopefully, I'm wrong.
WotC has no financial interest in modifying the GSL. It may help from a market perception perspective but I strongly suspect that 4e is successful enough that the legacy idea behind the OGL that 3rd-party product would drive more WotC content is considered insignificant. On the rare chance 4e is not as successful as hoped, it would be a foolish business plan for WotC to bank on a friendlier GSL driving 3rd-party product and in turn, driving WotC sales.
Even if we see an updated GSL, I don't think publishers will be lining up around the corner like with 3e.
Also, if I look into my dollar-store crystal ball, I also wouldn't be surprised that when 5e is announced it's closed. I also see the lack of 3rd-party participation in 4e being held up as a reason for not having any kind of OGL/GSL aside from perhaps a specific license for writing adventures. Hopefully, I'm wrong.
Last edited:
Jack99
Adventurer
It might or it might not change if some companies decide to support 4e. Anything is assumptions at this point.
However, a changed GSL might change what the companies who do support can do, and how they can do things, and that is very important to those of us who play 4e and like 3pp products.
primarchone
Explorer
Hi!
The golden question has always been if WOTC made money off the OGL.
You'll see a lot of speculation on this, but no official word.
My suspicion is that it didn't. I base that on 4e being GSL and much more closed in comparison to OGL. If OGL had been some sort of cash cow, it would not have been scrapped.
Corporations do all sort of weird things (to us non-corporate people anyway). But one thing you can always count them to do without fail is that which generates money. In my view the powers that be within WOTC decided that OGL didn't impact their bottom line and thus was changed.
I agree that the GSL, at this point is moot. Whatever sales expectations WOTC have for 4e are probably being met. Note that WOTC doesn't care or particularly benefit from a market full of competing product.
As things stand now, its actually quite a good situation for them. The majority of whats out there for 4e is their own stuff, so its far easier for them to hit a sales expectation than a market crowded with many more non wizards products. Thus GSL is low priority.
Some may view this as bad for the "hobby". But that's irrelevant to WOTC's bottom line. They'll take a much tighter market with fewer variety of products for consumers in which their products can make even better use of their already huge market presence advantage.
Primarchone
Last edited:
SteveC
Doing the best imitation of myself
I pretty much agree with this 100%. There are a lot of companies out there who made excellent 3X products that would do very well in the 4E era, but most of them aren't willing to jump in without a very firm set of legal legs to stand on.
A new GSL (or, if I can dream, an extension of the OGL) would bring a lot more folks home to D&D, since you'd have the opportunity to purchase products with a very different feel than what's coming out from WotC. As a simple example, I love the Paizo "look and feel" for their adventures, and I'd love to see them do something with 4E, but we're just not going to see that until there's a better license for them to work with. I'm sure for other people it's companies like Green Ronin, or Necromancer, or other companies altogether.
For me, when I was running a module, which I did for quite some time, I didn't use WotC's products, but rather ran Age of Worms and Shackled City. I'd love to run EN World's own War of the Burning Sky as well, but I'm looking to do so in 4E. If I get to the point where my own creative resources are tapped for 4E, and there aren't other alternatives, it will be time to move on to another game. I'm sure I'm not alone in that area either.
So I'd say that it really IS in WotC's best interest to get a revised GSL out there, and I hope they will. At this point, I'm not really expecting it anymore, so there you go.
--Steve
The Lost Muse
First Post
I agree completely that if WotC is going to actually offer licencing, the licence should be made available as quickly as possible.
Not to nitpick, but the OGL needs no extension. WotC could release an SRD for 4e under the OGL, and then everyone would be able to use that information along with the open game licence. Arguably, someone could create an OSRIC-like product for 4e, and release that under the ogl, and then publishers would be able to use that... but I would imagine there would be a lawsuit before anyone could safetly do so.
Not to nitpick, but the OGL needs no extension. WotC could release an SRD for 4e under the OGL, and then everyone would be able to use that information along with the open game licence. Arguably, someone could create an OSRIC-like product for 4e, and release that under the ogl, and then publishers would be able to use that... but I would imagine there would be a lawsuit before anyone could safetly do so.
Similar Threads
