New GSL Announcement

[Bacris]

Eh? You think WotC should give away their rules, but if others use the rules WotC has given away, they shouldn't have to give anything back? Would you like Scott Rouse's car, too? I mean - WotC isn't a charity!

No chance that will happen. Even the most benevolent busines in a world wouldn't just give everything away unconditionally. What would be the point of spending hundreds of thousands of dollars developing it in the first place?

It's also worth pointing out that the d20 STL specifically requires that a portion of the published material be Open Content. I wouldn't be surprised if that made it into the GSL in some fashion.

 

[mxyzplk]

Let's be precise, because this has been repeated several times now, and it's incorrect and it's getting under my skin.

WotC DOES in fact own the OGL. They wrote it, they copyrighted it, it's theirs. The DO control it. They and only they can make changes to the OGL.

Only in the least important sense. They can make new versions of the OGL - but they can't change or invalidate previous versions.

 

[Morrus]

It's also worth pointing out that the d20 STL specifically requires that a portion of the published material be Open Content. I wouldn't be surprised if that made it into the GSL in some fashion.

No it didn't. Here's the d20 STL. Which clause says that?

 

[SSquirrel]

I dunno, from what I've seen of the system I prefer 4E to 3.x. Then again, I also prefer Arcana Evolved to 3.x, so if I have to play something 3.x I'll play AE set in Ptolus

 

[Scipio202]

Only in the least important sense. They can make new versions of the OGL - but they can't change or invalidate previous versions.

Also, since WotC has copyrighted the wording of the OGL, if anyone wants to create a new OGL-like open license for games they'll need to write a new one thats sufficiently different from the OGL.

 

[Bacris]

No it didn't. Here's the d20 STL. Which clause says that?

d20 System Trademark Guide v5

Mandatory Requirements:

All Covered Products must comply with Quality Standards as described above and in the d20 System License.

A minimum of 5% of the text (word count or letter count) of a Covered Product must be Open Game Content and must comply with the terms of the Open Game License version 1.0a.

All Covered Products must display the d20 System Logo, or in the specific case of an ASCII text file, include the words “A d20 System Licensed Product.”

All Covered Products must include the following text block:

'd20 System' and the 'd20 System' logo are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and are used according to the terms of the d20 System License version 6.0. A copy of this License can be found at www.wizards.com/d20.

Permission is granted to translate this text into a non-English language, provided that the English text is also included, and that the translated text is identified as non-official.

 

[SSquirrel]

No. The d20 STL is revocable.

I had said
Quote SSquirrel:
Even if the d20 OGL was revoked existing versions of it could still be used.

Er, Morrus I was speaking of the OGL allowing old evrsions to work. You answered taht the d20 STL was revokable.

By that I assume you mean the OGL not the d20 STL. There's no such thing as a d20 OGL. But yes, the trend has been towards OGL only.

Yes sorry, the new stuff all has d20 in front of it and the SRD is the d20 SRD so I was just going for completeness Besides, there are other newer OGLs coming out like the T20 OGL, so I felt clarity was best.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

WotC can't revoke the OGL. WotC can revoke the GSL.

Well, presumably so-- we haven't seen the GSL yet. I expect so. I expect so mainly because the GSL such as it has been described so far feels a lot more like the d20 STL than the OGL.

If the GSL has the same kind of safety net features as the OGL... well then...

 

[mxyzplk]

Yes sorry, the new stuff all has d20 in front of it and the SRD is the d20 SRD so I was just going for completeness Besides, there are other newer OGLs coming out like the T20 OGL, so I felt clarity was best.

Not correct - there are no new "OGLs." There is one OGL (well, there's a couple versions). There are several SRDs for different games released in compliance with the OGL.

Can I suggest that folks brush up a lil' before they wax too eloquent?

OGL:
http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/OGLv1.0a.rtf

d20 STL:
http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/d20stlv6.rtf

SRD is not a term contained in the OGL. It's a "made up" term people use to indicate a conveeenient summary of open content for a game system.

The official d20 OGL SRD:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35

An example of another OGL SRD, Spirit of the Century:
http://zork.net/~nick/loyhargil/fate3/fate3.html

A list of the various extant SRDs:
http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/srd/

 

[Alzrius]

I'm not sure where you got that. There never was and never has been a plan to do a 3E version of the APG. Why would we need 3E versions of druids, bards, monks, barbarians and illusionists and gnomes and half-orcs? The game already has them

Our plan for 3E pdf supplements was for books that were planned as 3E books (like Tegel and Slumbering Tsar, etc) that got pushed back and now will be 4E books. The fans who were finishing 3E campaigns didnt like that so I said, "hey, they were written to be 3E, so when we put the 4E versions out, I will do a free download of the stats for you guys."

Clark

Whoops, okay, I erred in assumption there.

But the underlying point still stands. I'm much more likely to buy a 4E Necromancer Games product that has a 3E PDF supplement than one without one. That's a little bit of extra work from you guys - that you were going to do anyway - that directly translates into an extra sale. A sale that won't happen now for no reason except because the GSL says that you can't do that. You lose out, and I lose out. And somehow, WotC seems to think that this is a win for them. :\