Revised GSL TODAY!

JVisgaitis · Mar 2, 2009

Just got an email from Scott Rouse. The revised GSL is going live today. There isn't anything else I'd want from this. It's perfect. Thanks to Scott for finally getting this to us. It is greatly appreciated.

FourthBear · Mar 2, 2009

Thanks very much for the heads up! I put a link to this post on RPGnet, since I know that forum is also very interested in the GSL release.

DaveMage · Mar 2, 2009

It's up.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome

Daniel D. Fox · Mar 2, 2009

Sweet Baby Demogorgon! It looks great, thanks WotC!

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

Moniker said:
Sweet Baby Demogorgon! It looks great, thanks WotC!

1) Baby Demogorgons aren't sweet.

2) Good god that image. Two haded tentacle monkey babies. WAUGH.

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

Morrus posted this in the "Any word on the GSL" thread. He said this was sent in a letter along with the GSL to Publishers:

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Publishing friends,

I just wanted to let you know that the revision of GSL that we announced back in August 2008 is going live today (it should go up around 4PM PST). I have posted a copy for your reference.

Also a revised SRD, logos, and updated FAQ are being posted to: http://www.wizards.com/d20

Highlights include:

[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Removal of section 6, which set terms & conditions for 4e compatible product lines that may have been previously published under the Open Game License (OGL).
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Inclusion of a provision for a “Notice of Termination”, allowing publishers to end their use of the GSL at their choosing. This includes the addition of a 6-month inventory sell off period after executing a Notice of Termination.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Modification to imagery clause that clarifies use derivative art work.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Additions to the SRD from Player’s Handbook® 2, Monster Manual® 2, and Adventurer’s Vault™ including:
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Barbarian, bard, druid, and sorcerer class options [/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Alchemy, alchemical formula template, and alchemical items [/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Vehicles, mounts, and the vehicle template [/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Disease template [/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]Demons, devils, rust monster, metallic dragons, duergar, and over 50 other monsters
[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial]

I hope you find the revisions to your liking and I want to thank you for your patience as we revised the GSL.

Sincerely,

[/FONT]Scott Rouse
Sr. Brand Manager - Dungeons & Dragons
Wizards of the Coast LLC

Rechan · Mar 2, 2009

So. Any publisher want to explain what the real changes are? Or rather, what changed that was objected to for the most part?

What stayed that people dislike?

Do the new changes help?

How do people feel about this all?

I just know many people were unhappy with the previous GSL and calling doom and gloom, so I want someone who groks all this to explain it in layman.

joethelawyer · Mar 2, 2009

DaveMage said:
It's up.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome

anyone have the old one? i would like to do a word by word comparison.

Urizen · Mar 2, 2009

I'm still reading through it, but, as far as I can tell, since the old section 6 is out, we can now support our titles in both OGL AND GSL, so long as we are very careful not to violate the existing GSL (which supercedes the ogl),

So, as an example, if I decided I wanted to convert my Touch of Evil Game line, or Blood Throne, to 4e (which I'm now seriously considering), I could do so, as long as I don't redefine any of the terms in the SRD. Additionally, I can keep selling Blood Throne as a true20 product.

I'm going to need to check with a lawyer on that, but I believe I'm reading it right.

If anyone else interprets it differently, please speak up.