GSL and the .pdf market

[joshuha]

Variations of this quote also keep companies from developing any automated tools to assist with character generation, so you can wave goodbye to PCGen, Fantasy Grounds, or whatever you are using right now as a play aid.

Mark

Actually that clause really hasn't changed much in relation to the current D20 system license. Fantasy Grounds, for instance, never really did any kind of automated levelling up. You have to manually increase your stats, type in your feats, etc. It does do some calculation of what + modifier a 14 equates to and what not but I don't see any change in the language we have seen so far that would preclude that. Even if it did, Fantasy Grounds and other VTs could still make totally manual sheets and not be in violation as long as the definition of interactive game and its limitations are not expanded. And as I said earlier, the wording for interactive game seems to be the exact same as the d20 system license.

Now for PCGen and others that apply things when you level up your character, thats a seperate story and I am interested to see how that plays out.

 

[Fifth Element]

WotC seems pretty explicit that companies licensed to sell 4E-compatable goods will not be allowed to legally continue to sell 3.5/d20 products.

Where do you get that from? There has been no confirmation one way or the other. In fact, there have been seemingly contradictory statements from WotC staff, and WotC itself has not confirmed this one way or the other.

Where have they been explicit in this?

I see a lot of people inferring that this is the case. But by definition, if you have to infer something, then it's not explicit.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

If I might post a quote from the main ENWorld page (that you can still see if you scroll down) "PDF sellers will be asked to update their products within that six month time and remove the logo." So you answer is, if you are selling PDFs and you want to move to 4.0, you either need to update or stop selling within 6 months of deciding to sell 4.0 stuff.

Actually it has nothing to do with moving to 4e. Within 6 months if you want to keep selling the product, the d20 logo must be removed.

I'm surprised that everyone aren't posting more negative reactions. There will be no M&M, True20, C&C, Arcana Evolved, or equivalent written for 4.0 - "No Covered Product may contain rules or instructions of any kind that:

• Describe a process for Creating a Character
• Describe a process for Applying the Effects of Experience to a Character".

As I posted in another thread to your comment on this, you can still make these games, you just cannot instruct on how to make a character or apply XP. You can still have all the new classes, powers, feats etc. needed to make the a superhero game, you just can't describe how you assign points to the six attributes, then choose your race, class, powers etc. Your book will just provide all the alternatives to those listed in the PHB.

 

[RoguePlayingGames]

The debate and confusion just seems to be making my skull thicker and number.

If a company were to self-publish rpg material, I'm wondering if they could publish a specific product for 4e with the GSL, say a single generic fantasy genre adventure -- while at the same time, publish a campaign specific fantasy genre supplement for True20, or a Mutant & Mastermind accessory, etc...?

I do however understand -- if I'm reading and comprehending everything correctly -- a company could not publish "Merlin's Marvelous Magic Tome" for 4e as well as publish "Merlin's Marvelous Magic Tome" for 3.x, right?

 

[kenmarable]

If I might post a quote from the main ENWorld page (that you can still see if you scroll down) "PDF sellers will be asked to update their products within that six month time and remove the logo." So you answer is, if you are selling PDFs and you want to move to 4.0, you either need to update or stop selling within 6 months of deciding to sell 4.0 stuff.

Actually that's conflating two separate issues.

#1: End of the d20 STL
This has been officially mentioned by WotC and deals with the fact that they are retiring the d20 logo this year. So all products must be updated to remove the logo if they want to sell them regardless of any future publishing plans. So after Jan 1, no PDF can have the d20 logo, and only printed products that are out in the distribution chain can have them.

That is a separate issue from the OP, which is:

#2: 4e GSL "poison pill"
This was brought up by Clark to clarify some confusing comments, and has not been denied (and some of The Rouse's comments aren't "yes, that is the case" clear, but they are pretty darn close). This issue is that the 4e GSL will (allegedly) contain a clause if want to publish 4e products under the GSL, your company can never use the OGL again. Either you still publish OGL products OR you publish 4e GSL products.

The question the original poster was asking was - so what about companies that want to go 4e, but have a very large PDF back catalog? And the answer is, "We don't know." *shrug*

They have said that you can update your product and re-release it for 4e, but that might be impossible for any products that contain OGC from a different company. *shrug* We don't know yet.

I'm surprised that everyone aren't posting more negative reactions. There will be no M&M, True20, C&C, Arcana Evolved, or equivalent written for 4.0 - "No Covered Product may contain rules or instructions of any kind that:

• Describe a process for Creating a Character
• Describe a process for Applying the Effects of Experience to a Character".

Variations of this quote also keep companies from developing any automated tools to assist with character generation, so you can wave goodbye to PCGen, Fantasy Grounds, or whatever you are using right now as a play aid.

Mark

Those restrictions are in place for the 4e GSL and fantasy RPG products (technically I think it's the "D&D GSL"), but there will be another license down the road for non-fantasy products, and we have no idea what the terms of those will be.

Of course, on the one hand, we already have M&M, True20, etc., so why do we need more? But if you want 4e inspired ones, then, yes, you will have to be very careful. M&M is up in the air and depends on the future license. True20 type of game would have a very difficult time, but if you did it while avoiding character creation rules, or released it under the future license to be determined, it could still work. I'm not familiar enough with C&C to know for sure, but I do know that with Arcana Evolved, you could rip out the character creation rules, and still have a product that looks 99% the same. It's not stand alone, but the real value in that book isn't the XP charts and how to roll stats by any means. So Arcana Evolved and possibly even Iron Heroes (though I'm less familiar with it) could live just as happily under the 4e GSL as they could with the OGL with only some minor changes.

 

[kenmarable]

The debate and confusion just seems to be making my skull thicker and number.

If a company were to self-publish rpg material, I'm wondering if they could publish a specific product for 4e with the GSL, say a single generic fantasy genre adventure -- while at the same time, publish a campaign specific fantasy genre supplement for True20, or a Mutant & Mastermind accessory, etc...?

I do however understand -- if I'm reading and comprehending everything correctly -- a company could not publish "Merlin's Marvelous Magic Tome" for 4e as well as publish "Merlin's Marvelous Magic Tome" for 3.x, right?

Actually, AS MANY CURRENTLY UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE (which is based on a lot of inferences, statements by Clark Peterson who has more info than the rest of us, and a lack of denials as well as some non-confirming but supporting statements), it sounds like your first scenario might be out as well. If you publish under the D&D GSL, you cannot publish under the OGL. So that would rule out supporting 4e and M&M for example. Now, maybe it might say you can't publish FANTASY products under the OGL, so M&M would be ok, but fantasy True20 would be out.

*shrug*

We don't know. From past comments, Scott Rouse said he should be back in WotC HQ and have the final license in hand by today and then definitive answers that people want over the next week. So I wouldn't expect any concrete information until next Friday. If it's earlier, great, but I wouldn't expect it. Everything else (including every word I say above) is just speculation in the intertubes.