NEW D&D Player's Guide info!

[Berandor]

Yes! Yes! YES!!!! I am SO glad to see that you all have given the subraces Tellene names!! It was one of the biggest things I was worried about when I playtested the PG.

I totally agree!
And I also hope that there is a small info on Deijy tribes, because so far I have named the Deijy languages "Deijy 1, 2 and 3"

Just because I couldn't place any of the tribal names given in the PG in a specific region.
And because the Deijy don't play a very important role in my campaign at the moment.

And I hope you changed the Doulathlan description even more. I liked the different take on them but it was not too different... and I would have liked more changes, especially concerning the societal system!

Berandor

 

[Psion]

You said that many publishers collectively working together strengthens the whole. Ok, I can't disagree with that statement, but I wonder if it really applies. If all d20 publishers were working together on one campaign setting, I would definitely agree. But they're not - they're working on their individual worlds and settings, pulling whatever they feel is appropriate from the SRD and OGL. So you've conceivably got several different versions of the same rules.

This is true. But it would be true anyways. For example, both living imaginations' Twin Crowns and S&SS's Relics & Rituals have ritual rules. I imagine we will also see a large menagarie of rules for other things as well. And games will buy multiple products. And eventually, if they decide to use a certain concept, they will have to decide which version to use.

But when a designer decides "why reinvent the wheel", they may grab another designer's concept and use it in their own game. And it is pleasant an reassuring for the gamer when they pick up Dragonstar and see that they can use the same rules as Deadlands for automatic weapons, or they sea that Skull & Crossbones will use the same naval combat system as Seas of Blood, or that their necromantic priest from Gar'Udok's can use spells from Relics & Rituals and Necromany: Beyond the Grave. (All real examples, mind you.)

And the cream will float to the top.

So I don't think that making it open increases the appeal of the product itself. By throwing in with the open movement can do two things:
- builds your position as part of the network. If a player uses "scaling spells" as part of a product, and knows it comes from your product, they might be more inclined to explore your product.
- makes the rules you use more familiar to others.

Also, I can't speak as to the exact legalities of our contract with WotC, but the OGL didn't even exist when we first made our agreement with them (to make Kingdoms of Kalamar an official D&D world). It wasn't even an option.

Ah, well I didn't know that, and it might have answered my next concern. I thought the timing was similar.

Ok, I really have to question this one. Do you mean that if our products were simply d20, they would be cheaper? If so, that's certainly not the case. We give our fans the best we can, packing our products full of text and info, and keeping them all as affordable as possible.

Is it not true that the cover price reflects a licensing fee that you must pay to Wizards? A licensing fee that you would not have had to pay if it where published under the license-fee free D20 STL?

I'm guessing your last statement clarifies WHY you didn't go that route and also that you can't answer this one, but I am guessing that if Kalamar products where published under the OGL, they would be cheaper.

 

[Dristram]

And I hope you changed the Doulathlan description even more. I liked the different take on them but it was not too different... and I would have liked more changes, especially concerning the societal system!

Berandor

Dude! High-five my brother! I couldn't agree more!

I have a feeling though, that WotC probably prevented that

 

[Hard8Staff]

Psion:

The cover prices DO reflect a licensing fee.

But if were printing without the D&D logo, our print runs would be lower meaning a higher per unit cost, so I THINK it might be a wash...no way to know.

We did indeed negotiate our contract long before 3e ever hit the streets or even the first dragon promoting the same. I think at that time the whole d20 license was a twinkle in Mr. Dancey's eye.

I leave you with this: simply because we don't have an SRD of our own up on our site, doesn't mean we won't release open content when we get around to it. We hardly have enough folks to get our products out the door, and our immediate need to pay the rent currently exceeds our need to contribute to the community. I anticipate that this will change when our growing pains end and we get on our feet.

Dave

 

[Hard8Staff]

Actually, I have to check our contract to see if we're even allowed to release anything for open content. I think WOTC may be doing that for us, but I'm not certain...typically, I spend my time writing and playing games (and raising kids).

Dave

 

[Dristram]

More to the point, D&D player will buy D20 system products whether or not it has a d20 logo on it. And those who are finnicky enough to draw a distinction draw that distinction based on the WotC logo, not the D&D one.

Maybe I'm strange, but I won't touch d20 products. At least not until I'm tired of the official D&D stuff. Right now, enough of that exists to satisfy me. And I may not have even bothered with KoK had it not been considered the 3rd official D&D setting, joining the ranks of Greyhawk (my old fav) and FR (gray-box was better IMHO). I was well on my way to creating my own setting before I found KoK.

I'm a purist type of personality. I stick to official D&D products. And for me, KoK is the best of the 3E settings.

 

[Quickbeam]

Mark & Dave:

As someone whose been very intrigued by the KoK concept, I couldn't be more excited about this announcement. Our group has three players (myself included) that turns DMing in completely different settings. KoK is one of the few campaign worlds I've been considering for my next go-round, and I wanted to peruse a reference tome like the Player's Guide mentioned herein before I moved forward.

 

[Pigeon]

On the topic of OGC and the like.

I know I for one probably won't be buying the book - just because it's not OGC. I'm no publisher, but I do have a campaign website and I get consistant feedback from my players that one of the thigs they enjoy most is me posting new feats, spells ect that I have taken from one source or another.

Now I know it's unlikely that I'm going to get jumped on by a pack of legal demons for sticking one or two copyrighted feats on my website (that gets a maximum of 4 hits a day from people outside my gaming group) but I feel that it's only fair to play by the rules after WotC have been so generous with the whole Open Gaming content anyhow.

Therefore if I can't pilage the book I'm unlikely to buy it.

 

[Forlorn]

Maybe I'm strange,

You certainly are, I mean would a normal person dress like this?

but I won't touch d20 products. At least not until I'm tired of the official D&D stuff. Right now, enough of that exists to satisfy me. And I may not have even bothered with KoK had it not been considered the 3rd official D&D setting, joining the ranks of Greyhawk (my old fav) and FR (gray-box was better IMHO). I was well on my way to creating my own setting before I found KoK.

I'm a purist type of personality. I stick to official D&D products. And for me, KoK is the best of the 3E settings.

Speaking as a member of Dristrams gaming group, he loves KoK. I find it interesting, he loves it. Personally I too look forward to the Players Guide and Psion, I think your fears really are unfounded. Walking down the aisle at my local gaming store, I am alot more likely to pick up and look at the item with the DnD logo on it then one with just the D20 going for it.

Open source is good, but sometimes, whether you like it or not, propriatary (sic i think) is better.

Oh yeah, that is actually a picture of Dristram linked above.

 

[Berandor]

Speaking as a member of Dristrams gaming group, he loves KoK. I find it interesting, he loves it. Personally I too look forward to the Players Guide .

That is interesting.
I think at least until now, kalamar has been much of a DM's world. Players probably need the crunchy bits supplied in the Player's guide to really absorb a setting.

I can only say that the situation in my group is the same. I mean, I arranged for us to become playtesters just to lure the group over to Kalamar

Then I had an apocalyptic plot for the last FR campaign...

Anyway, while I am a total bugger for KoK, my group finds it, like you, interesting.

I'm sure the PG will change that.

Berandor