D&D Has the Biggest Playerbase, So Why is it the Hardest for 3rd Party to Market Too?

[Jester David]

I am confused. What other games exist out there that have any sort of 3rd party material released for them?

In terms of roleplaying games? There are 3rd Party books for Pathfinder, Vampire, and several others. Plus fan sites.
For games in generally, you can buy 3rd Party video gaming accessories. Like different console controllers and the like. And I've seen unofficial board game expansions.

Just like you can customise your car, iPad, iPhone, action figure, assault rifle, bike, etc with optional add-ons that aren't supplied by the manufacturer and are just listed as "compatible".

 

[Mistwell]

What first party, second party and third party mean in law/court documents is not the same as what they mean in other industries.

As law applies to all industries and the meaning of those terms is most applicable to legal issues that arise in those industries and the words all are legal definitions, I disagree.

Here is a link that explains the difference in the video game industry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_developer

Ah, I see the confusion now. A "second party developer" in that context IS a consumer - just not of games. They bought the license to a platform (from Microsoft, for example). They then sell to another consumer, and for THAT transaction they would be the first party. But, for the transaction between Microsoft and them, they were the consumer, and so the second party. It even says it in your own link, "where the term "second-party" originally referred to the consumers".

 

[Parmandur]

How are we discussing contract law though? No one is entering into a contract.

Well, I suppose, since using the OGL is a thing, you could make the argument that it's a contract law issue, but, the colloquial use is certainly well established in gaming. Paizo, when it produced Dungeon and Dragon magazines, were typically referred to as a second party publisher since they were under direct contract with WotC and were not bound by the OGL. 3rd party, AFAIK, in these conversations, always refers to OGL producers.

The consumer has never, ever, been part of these conversations since the consumer is always the same - D&D gamers. Even the acronym, 3PP has the word PUBLISHER right in the name. It's just that currently, with 5e, there are virtually no 2pp's on the market.

What a very strange argument. 3pp refers to publishers, 2pp have always (in gaming conversations anyway) referred to publishers and of course 1pp means WotC or whatever company has created its own OGL (and thus 2pp and 3pp's) for its game.

Is this really in question?

It isn't so much "in question" as it is "wrong."

 

[MarkB]

(I also wouldn’t be surprised to find out that the phrase “3rd party” has its origins in legalese.)

I suspect its origins are literary, stemming from the concepts of point-of-view in written works - First Person ("I"), Second Person ("You") and Third Person ("Him/Her/Them").

Thus, a contract between a seller and a customer is written from the seller as the First Person ("I set out these terms") to the customer as the Second Person ("You agree to the following"), and may refer to others as the Third Person ("They may provide additional services"). Substituting "party" for "person" because the agreements may be between organisations rather than individuals.

 

[Lord_Blacksteel]

I am confused. What other games exist out there that have any sort of 3rd party material released for them?

Pathfinder, Savage Worlds, ICONS, Hero System has had them before, Mutants and Masterminds has been doing for all 3 editions ...

Any system that adapts a third party license of some sort is allowing those third parties to publish supporting material. It got to be fairly popular since the OGL first became a thing.

Just jump to DTRPG and type in your favorite system - there's a pretty good chance there is non-publisher material for it.

(Note - licensed IP's will not have this, typically)

 

[Hussar]

It isn't so much "in question" as it is "wrong."

Umm, no?

Colloquial or not, it is still pretty commonly understood that first, second or third party publishers don't refer to consumers. It's not wrong since, well, that's what is understood by everyone who uses the terms. That's how English (or any language for that matter) works. So, yes, it is perfectly understandable by anyone who isn't simply playing silly buggers semantic games that second party publishers are companies who publish for a specific game but are not under the umbrella of whatever OGL that particular game uses and aren't the primary publisher for that game.

Tring to bring in legal definitions into the discussion ignores how the term is used in the industry and has been used for quite some time now. It also ignores the fact that first, second and third party are all PUBLISHERS. The terms aren't first, second and third party, the terms are first, second and third party publishers.

 

[TwoSix]

What first party, second party and third party mean in law/court documents is not the same as what they mean in other industries.

Here is a link that explains the difference in the video game industry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_developer

And here is one that shows the difference in the data sharing market:

http://www.knowonlineadvertising.com/what-is-first-party-second-party-and-third-party-data/

I am sure there are others as well.

Good enough for me, and Google turns up plenty of links where the term is used. It has a meaning for video game developers outside of normal contract discussion, and a term that's used for video game developers can be pretty easily related to TT game developers. As a hardcore descriptivist, I'm easy to satisfy.

 

[Parmandur]

Umm, no?

Colloquial or not, it is still pretty commonly understood that first, second or third party publishers don't refer to consumers. It's not wrong since, well, that's what is understood by everyone who uses the terms. That's how English (or any language for that matter) works. So, yes, it is perfectly understandable by anyone who isn't simply playing silly buggers semantic games that second party publishers are companies who publish for a specific game but are not under the umbrella of whatever OGL that particular game uses and aren't the primary publisher for that game.

Tring to bring in legal definitions into the discussion ignores how the term is used in the industry and has been used for quite some time now. It also ignores the fact that first, second and third party are all PUBLISHERS. The terms aren't first, second and third party, the terms are first, second and third party publishers.

Bringing in legal definition of legal terms in the context of legal language seems fairly legit, tautologically speaking.

That video game enthusiasts misuse words hardly has bearing on their proper usage, so yes, the legitimacy of the usage is highly in question, though really the answer is patent.

 

[TwoSix]

Bringing in legal definition of legal terms in the context of legal language seems fairly legit, tautologically speaking.

That video game enthusiasts misuse words hardly has bearing on their proper usage, so yes, the legitimacy of the usage is highly in question, though really the answer is patent.

Yea, but gish.

 

[happyhermit]

What first party, second party and third party mean in law/court documents is not the same as what they mean in other industries.

Here is a link that explains the difference in the video game industry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_developer
...

From the link;

Second-party developer is a colloquial term often used by gaming enthusiasts and media to describe game studios who take development contracts from platform holders and produce games exclusive to that platform.
...
Activision in 1979 became the first third-party video game developer,[8] where the term "second-party" originally referred to the consumers.

So, we can agree that in video game development, through colloquial usage the term has lost some of it's original meaning. I don't think it has in TTRPGs. I have been involved in them for a long time and have never heard of 2nd party publishers. We always considered it to have the original and more universal definition (2nd party is the consumer) and you are saying we are now wrong because "video games"? I have no problem with language evolving but I am not seeing a case here for "accepted use" unless I am just missing all the examples of ttrpg companies being referred to as 2nd party.