WotC Seeks Unity with a New Edition

IronWolf · Jan 9, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
So, I clickie the "become a part of this!" link, and went to the D&D Next group, and saw this little number:

....oh hai draconian claim of intellectual property on my words.

We ain't off to a roaring start here, are we?

That seems pretty boilerplate and there for their protection. I believe Paizo has something similar for their forums?

Mark CMG · Jan 9, 2012

No mention of the Open Game License. They really should have said something about that right out of the gate. It's one of the cornerstones of what made 3.XE so successful. I imagine a lot of gamers are going to be disappointed if they don't use it and don't make mention of it fairly soon.

Plus, where's the need to sign an NDA for a "public" playtest? Seems odd to start off open playtesting with that contradiction (or is the actual open part some way down the road and the early shape of the game is not so open?).

Umbran · Jan 9, 2012

Kamikaze Midget said:
....oh hai draconian claim of intellectual property on my words.

We ain't off to a roaring start here, are we?

That really is pretty standard boilerplate, and necessary, from their point of view.

If they didn't have that, how many people would find similarities between things they wrote (however vague or distant the similarity) and things that got published, such that they might want to lay a claim? This boilerplate basically means, "Dude, if you post it, you lose the right to claim we stole it from you."

I'm A Banana · Jan 9, 2012

Isn't that the boilerplate stuff they say on all of WotC forum, and in fact on most game creator forums?

It may be. Still, it does grate on me. This is perhaps because I am over-sensitive to copyright issues, though.

Steel_Wind · Jan 9, 2012

Nagol said:
If I toss on my conspiracy hat, I'd say that providing a two-hour exclusive window may have been a requirement to get what is effectively ad copy into a NYT article.

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w

unctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-CA</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="&#45-"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->If ENWorld is breathing the same rarefied air as the NYTImes, CNN.com, and Forbes.com? Two hours, schmoo hours, I say.

All the mainstream press has -- and will have - is “spin” and copy+paste press-release info. If you are actually looking for “the beef”? My guess is ENWorld will be the place to find it, as ever.

Stumblewyk · Jan 9, 2012

I signed up for the potential playtest opportunity.

...

I just talked 2 gaming groups into switching from 4e to PF. And created a third to play another PF game. Like...all within the last 6 months or so.

...and now I'm already pondering the possibilities of 5e. Thinking things like, "But it's D&D! It's the mothership! And...and they want player input! It's going to be modular! It's going to be simple and quick, or complex and cumbersome, as much as I want it to be!"

Will my players ever forgive me for my game system adultery? I just can't stay true to one game...

Shecky · Jan 9, 2012

Dausuul said:
I'm not sure guys are allowed to squee, but I'm doing it anyway.

Of course guys squee. See Pat Rothfuss. See Pat Rothfuss squee. Squee, Pat Rothfuss, squee.

S'mon · Jan 9, 2012

I'm not personally interested in a new edition, but I wish them the best of luck. I hope it turns out well and maybe there'll be stuff in there I can nick for my 1e, Pathfinder and 4e campaigns.

kitsune9 · Jan 9, 2012

Mark CMG said:
No mention of the Open Game License. They really should have said something about that right out of the gate. It's one of the cornerstones of what made 3.XE so successful. I imagine a lot of gamers are going to be disappointed if they don't use it and don't make mention of it fairly soon.

I can see how 3PP would find this new announcement very underwhelming if there's no OGL or another GSL for the new edition. Let's be optimistic and hope that Wizards will do something that will allow 3PP to play too.

Kzach · Jan 9, 2012

Naysayer here.

I do not believe in democracy. I can't go into the reasons why without earning a ban, but suffice it to say that I don't have any, and I mean zero, faith in humanity to make intelligent decisions. People need to be ruled.

The division within the D&D community isn't because of different editions, it's because people are inherently divisive. Design by committee doesn't work anywhere else so it's not going to work here either. WotC should ignore the community entirely, especially the online community, and just make games.

Asking people what they want is stupid because people don't know what they want. WotC should become more like Apple and less like a socialist republic.