GSL questions for Scott Rouse and Mike Lescault

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'm sad to hear that, but I cant disagree with you.

Well, the good news is that a robust Pathfinder/3e community almost ensures that Necro will see some of my dollars anyway, assuming I can find some of your older stuff I still don't have (Wilderlands, some adventures, etc.)

I can't think of any reason that you won't see me spending the same amount of money on Necro print and PDF products as I always have-- it just probably won't be 4e stuff.

 

[Rauol_Duke]

A bit off-topic...

Clark, if the GSL, or whatever WotC ends up dealing you, is too restrictive to do all of the things you want to do with 4E, would you consider continuing to publish those things not allowed by the GSL using the OGL as 3.5 products? If so, can you comment on where that would leave a product such as Slumbering Tsar, Part 1: The Desolation? I would truely like to see that, as well as the other parts published using the 3.5 rules.

Thanks.

 

[DaveMage]

I can't think of any reason that you won't see me spending the same amount of money on Necro print and PDF products as I always have-- it just probably won't be 4e stuff.

I'd just thought I'd quote this again for Clark to see.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'd just thought I'd quote this again for Clark to see.

Well, PDF publishing pretty much ensures that 3.5 products will never go out of print...

... and Pathfinder pretty much ensures that 3.5 products won't go out of style.

 

[Orcus]

Clark, if the GSL, or whatever WotC ends up dealing you, is too restrictive to do all of the things you want to do with 4E, would you consider continuing to publish those things not allowed by the GSL using the OGL as 3.5 products? If so, can you comment on where that would leave a product such as Slumbering Tsar, Part 1: The Desolation? I would truely like to see that, as well as the other parts published using the 3.5 rules.

Thanks.

My number one goal, philosophically, is to support the modern version of the rules. I'v explained why in numerous threads. If 4E is licensed, I dont really see a way it would be too restrictive for me. Just make adventures? Fine. Just make sourcebooks? Fine.

The only way I could see directly supporting 3.5 is if 4E wasnt licensed at all.

But this thread is about what is up with the OGL/GSL/4E, not so much my publishing plans. I can start a seperate thread for that.

 

[Rauol_Duke]

My number one goal, philosophically, is to support the modern version of the rules. I'v explained why in numerous threads. If 4E is licensed, I dont really see a way it would be too restrictive for me. Just make adventures? Fine. Just make sourcebooks? Fine.

The only way I could see directly supporting 3.5 is if 4E wasnt licensed at all.

But this thread is about what is up with the OGL/GSL/4E, not so much my publishing plans. I can start a seperate thread for that.

Fair enough, Clark. Thanks for the prompt reply. I'll look forward to hearing what you've got planned.

 

[Orcus]

Fair enough, Clark. Thanks for the prompt reply. I'll look forward to hearing what you've got planned.

No problem!

Presuming 4E is open to some extent, and the following products are allowed, I am plannining several cool things:

1. The Iron Tower Adventure Path
2. Tome of Horrors 4E
3. The Advanced Player's Guide (with some alternative classes and things, such as druids and bards, etc; not intended to supplant whatever official version Wizards does, just provided as alternates).

and, just for you, a little scoop--I havent even posted on my own boards:

4. Tegel Manor

I just got things straightened out with Bob Bledsaw for it to go forward for 4E if 4E is open to any degree that would allow it.

Clark

 

[Orcus]

By the way, if you want evidence of what open gaming can do -- look around.

This community is a community of open gaming. This site started as a 3E scoop site and quickly turned into a community for open gaming and third party publishers. Heck, ENWorld does awards for OGL/d20 products. It has a print company that publishes d20/OGL products!

Just look what open gaming has done.

This community is a voice. It is a presence. Even those here who arent thinking of adopting 4E or are vocally in favor of it (like me), we are here voicing our views on a site that is the result of open gaming. And we have all stuck with D&D and with this site for as long as we have in large part because of open gaming and the companies that come from it, and more importantly all of our ability to use our creativity and support the game we love. Is Wizards losing money from our books or the pdf publishers? Goodness, of course not. But here we are at this huge community, that is essentially a shrine to open gaming.

I think this community will do the same for 4E.

I remember at first here at ENWorld there were naysayers for 3E (hard to imagine, I know . But look at what happened. We all thrived and grew together because we were all allowed to add our creativity to the game we love. It kept us playing D&D.

This whole site is a testament to open gaming. Think about that for a minute.

It was a stroke of pure genius to open D&D. It empowered all of us gamers, who are a creative lot, to add to and build on the game we love so much. D&D isnt like, say, Diet Coke--a product that you consume. D&D is a passion for us and a lifestyle. Allowing us to support it is essentially allowing us to be a part of it and that in turn keeps us connected to it.

I know that Wizards understands that.

Remember, Wizards is the company that saved D&D and that provided open gaming in the first place. I, for one, support them and I believe that they still support open gaming. I have to believe that.

So if I was the cause of any discontent last Friday, I am sorry. I am passionate because I care about D&D and about open gaming. Where would this community be without it?

Clark

 

[Orcus]

Clark, I know your not psychic and all, but as an attourney what would you see the legal team at WotC advising the management? Both assuming they understand gaming, and assuming they don't/ (I'll understand if you don't want to answer put words into other people's mouths).

I am not a psychic. They cut that power from Orcus when they went to 4E Just kidding.

I am also not going to give legal advice

But if I was Wizards, I would do one of two things:

Either:

1. Just make a smarter SRD and use the current OGL; or
2. Make a smart SRD for 4E, designate it all as PI and provide a PI agreement for us that brings back into it all the restrictions from the STL/Guide, and provide a D&D logo.

I outlined the options before earlier in this thread I think (I get so confused).

Notice that both of my options include doing teh SRD for 4E differently than they did for 3E. I know that will aggravate some people, but that is what I would do.

Clark

 

[Orcus]

If you scroll up this page of the thread, you will see my four options as I see them. You asked what I would counsel Wizards to pick. Either B or C. In my thread I guessed they would do C, which is how I would structure the GSL if I was them.