OGC Repository

[Michael Sorensen]

I would be more inclined to agree with you, Eric, but publishers have no *legal* right to pick and choose -- OGC is OGC. Any such agreements would be purely gentlemanly, and you can bet that if the publishers balk at such a repository someone will create it just out of spite.
I am suggesting that the publishers view such a repository as a marketing tool and take advantage -- most of the d20 publishers are offering OGC that is fairly setting specific (please correct me if I am wrong about that), which would drive sales of the "creamy" bits -- setting books, etc. For example, it would probably be difficult to cram the Sovereign Stone magic system into FR, and maintain the feel of the setting -- but if I really like the magic system I would proabably be more willing to give the setting books a chance.

 

[CRG]

The OGC is OGC.

As a publisher, it's not a legal issue whether or not I call it that.

The issue is do I spend time and money pulling out only the crunch from the stuff I sell into a single repository for end-users versus a repository for developers.

Now, if someone wants to do all the collecting on their own, fine. Whatever. But as a publisher, I don't think I'd participate direclty if it was a public repository. I'd have no incentive.

As OGC, there doesn't seem to be anything prohibiting an interested party in pulling all this data together. Go for it. However, I wouldn't expect alot of help from publishers unless there is some benefit to them. A publisher exchage, maybe with some other things flying around in the background (previous designs of an already released PrC, some future spoilers, etc.) and I see benefit - much like folks developing D20 Modern games before D20 modern is released - value in the sharing at that level for the publishers.

Once you have the SS Magic system in an indexed, easy to gank format, do you think folks will go out and buy the book or encourage others to do so? And if so, would that hurt or hinder their sales? If someone were to put together a business case showing the publisher that this kind of thing ultimately helped their sales then there you go - you have your incentive. I would expect that's a rather hard sell.

 

[Michael Sorensen]

>> The issue is do I spend time and money pulling out only the crunch from the stuff I sell into a single repository for end-users versus a repository for developers.

>>Now, if someone wants to do all the collecting on their own, fine. Whatever. But as a publisher, I don't think I'd participate direclty if it was a public repository. I'd have no incentive.

I agree with this -- I would not expect the publishers to be doing the busy work -- that would have to come from the community.

But I would think that the publishers would want to contribute logos, have links to sales locations for the relevent books, provide a sales pitch to put the OGC in context, and other useful marketing tools.

Not to be repetitive, but I think that such a repository is inevitable, and it would be short-sighted of the d20 publishers to not take the opportunity to help shape such a repository in a mututally beneficial manner.

 

[The Sigil]

My thoughts...

The issue is do I spend time and money pulling out only the crunch from the stuff I sell into a single repository for end-users versus a repository for developers.

I think the issue is the same either way... it's simply "do I spend time and money" to pull this. A repository for developers is likely to become a repository for end-users fairly quickly - I don't think the developers can pick and choose without setting off the community. Either that, or we'll see a mass of 1-page PDFs so people can say, "I'm a publisher." Whereever you draw the line, people will be unhappy.

Now, if someone wants to do all the collecting on their own, fine. Whatever. But as a publisher, I don't think I'd participate direclty if it was a public repository. I'd have no incentive.

I may be in the minority, but I have seen evidence that publishers ARE willing to do this once product sales tail off to next-to-nothing. At this point, IMO, they have little to lose. I will let publishers speak for themselves, but I have to think that products like Legions of Hell and the Creature Collection (vol I) really don't sell too much any more.

Given that even the publishers seem to be very community-minded and have a conscientious sense of building the community, I would honestly be very surprised if most publishers said, "I won't take part." I expect them to say, "I'll take part on my own schedule, putting a delay between the release of my product on shelves and adding it to the OGC repository" but that's nothing more than good business and I doubt anyone will begrudge them that... just as long as OGC is released in a little more timely fashion than the SRD.

IOW, I don't expect to see OGC from "the latest and greatest" products in the repository - I do hope we see OGC from "the tried and true classics" in the repository.

As OGC, there doesn't seem to be anything prohibiting an interested party in pulling all this data together. Go for it. However, I wouldn't expect alot of help from publishers unless there is some benefit to them. A publisher exchage, maybe with some other things flying around in the background (previous designs of an already released PrC, some future spoilers, etc.) and I see benefit - much like folks developing D20 Modern games before D20 modern is released - value in the sharing at that level for the publishers.

There is something to be said for that too... don't have much to add/discuss here so I won't.

Once you have the SS Magic system in an indexed, easy to gank format, do you think folks will go out and buy the book or encourage others to do so? And if so, would that hurt or hinder their sales?

Again, if you release OGC into the repository once your sales are down to negligible, it's basically impossible to hurt your sales.

If someone were to put together a business case showing the publisher that this kind of thing ultimately helped their sales then there you go - you have your incentive. I would expect that's a rather hard sell.

Not really... provided you assume a "delay." Let us take your example of the SS Magic System. Let us assume for a moment that sales of the SS Campaign Setting Book (which has all of the rules needed to run the Magic System) have ground basically to a halt. Sure, you will get a residual sale now and again, but by and large, everyone who wanted to buy your product has a copy.

You can release more "Books o' SS Spells" but they appeal to a limited audience - those who already have the SSCS. This means by definition you limit your market on BoSSS to those who have the means to purchase both the SSCS and the BoSSS.

Since the SSCS isn't really selling any more anyway, you add your Magic System to the repository as OGC. This is like Free Advertising and it doesn't cut into your sales (since you're no longer making sales on the SSCS, there are no sales to cut into).

NOW you release your BoSSS. Who is your audience now? The entire RPGing community... because they can go get the basic system for free off the web. Now instead of limiting potential buyers to those who can afford both the SSCS and the BoSSS, your potential buyers become those who can afford the BoSSS, regardless of whether or not they can afford the SSCS as well. It goes without saying that this is a much larger market.

There - a simple business case that (I hope) makes it clear why it makes business sense to add to a freely available OGC repository. The only thing you have to do is give publishers some "lag time" to sell their products in the first place before they add to the repository, and there is no business reason not to. I think most of them already have the moral/ethical/emotional desire to add to such a thing to help the community. Now, they can't do it immediately or it's financial suicide.

IOW, if you allow publishers to have their product on the shelf for a while (a year? two? I don't pretend to the sales:time curve for every publisher) before they add their stuff to the repository, I really have a hard time coming up with a case AGAINST an OGC repository for a publisher.

Obviously, for the "end-user" this would also be an incredible boon - over time, you could pull rules and such from a number of different sources, suited to your campaign world, without having to spend money on every supplement out there. I think most of us are willing to pay for nicely formatted and illustrated books. I think most of us are willing to pay to have it "now" rather than wait a year or two before it is added to the repository. But such a repository means that perhaps we find something we really like that we wouldn't have found otherwise.

posted by Michael Sorenson:
Not to be repetitive, but I think that such a repository is inevitable, and it would be short-sighted of the d20 publishers to not take the opportunity to help shape such a repository in a mututally beneficial manner.

I agree - it IS inevitable. If the publishing community gets its act together, then they can have some say in how stuff is added, they can put their ads on it, and so on. In other words, it becomes a tool for them. If the publishers "play nice" and show they are willing to contribute given some parameters (such as a delay), it will be the premiere OGC site on the net, and the gaming community will support it.

If they DON'T jump on board, it will probably come to resemble Napster... stuff will be added a day or two after its release and severely undercut sales - but the publishing community will have a harder time shutting the place down (especially if the proprietors do their OGL homework - in which case the publishers may not be able to do anything at all)! The publishers will be frustrated because the thing will be out of their hands and so they'll declare only the bare minimum as OGC. The community will be frustrated by the "evil publishing giants" trying to squelch OGC. The cycle worsens. Perception is reality.

Basically, I think that it's gonna happen and there are really only 2 ways for publishers to go on this...

1.) Support a community/site and retain some measure of goodwill with the community and control of their material.

2.) Don't support it and get run into the ground - either due to their material winding up on a "Napster-esque" site so quickly that they can't turn a profit or due to consumer backlash when they act to reduce OGC and/or kill the site.

To be honest, I think most publishers DO want to see a repository - and they do want a little control over what goes into it. It only makes sense for them to do #1. The question is, will they do it soon enough to avoid #2? I'm not trying to sound doomsday-ish, I'm just trying to be realistic.

My 2 cents (and then some)... everyone else feel free to jump in.

--The Sigil

 

[Maerdwyn]

I'm not sure if this would be feasible, but how about a system like this.

Rather than containing hundres of pieces of OCG en masse, the proposed website instead contains a searchable database of summaries of the OGC contained in various products. Essentially, the site becomes not a OGC repository, but a colllection reviews of individual OGC "crunchy bits" (as opposed to reviews of products in their entireties)

When a company publishes a work containing OGC, either they, or someone who has the work would submit a concise, non-playable summary of each major piece of the OGC contained, such as:

"A system for assigning CR ratings to hazardous terrain such as deserts"

or

"This prestige class is an Arcane spellcaster whose focus is on the controlling this relating to the ocean and those who travel on or under it"


Attatched to the same entry in the database would be:
1) The name of the work containing the piece of OCG
2) The author of the OCG
3) a link to the publisher's contact information/website.
4) a public rating system, (perhaps poll-driven, perhaps comment driven) so the community could express how useful/balanced/etc. the particular piece of OGC is.
5) The category of OGC contained (PRCs, Spells, Monsters, etc.)


A search for "Mass combat" might return short descriptions of the mass combat systems in "Fields of Blood," "The Open Mass Combat System," Kaptain Kantrip's mass combat resolution system form these boards, etc., but would not bring up descriptions of all the descriptions of the PRCs in the Quintessential Fighter, or the rest of its content.

When someone wishes to find and potentially use OGC from another source, that person can search the database, read the comments others have made about the various results, and decide what pieces of OGC they want to use in their own work.

Then the person can either buy the book if it contains what they need or can contact the publisher directly to try to work another arrangement, and to notify them of their intent to use the OGC.

Any thoughts?

 

[The Sigil]

Already done...

I'm not sure if this would be feasible, but how about a system like this.

Rather than containing hundres of pieces of OCG en masse, the proposed website instead contains a searchable database of summaries of the OGC contained in various products. Essentially, the site becomes not a OGC repository, but a colllection reviews of individual OGC "crunchy bits" (as opposed to reviews of products in their entireties)

When a company publishes a work containing OGC, either they, or someone who has the work would submit a concise, non-playable summary of each major piece of the OGC contained, such as:

"A system for assigning CR ratings to hazardous terrain such as deserts"

or

"This prestige class is an Arcane spellcaster whose focus is on the controlling this relating to the ocean and those who travel on or under it"

Already have this. It's called the "OGC Exchange."

Obviously, it's not what people want or we wouldn't be having this discussion. My guess is that people don't want to know "where is the OGC?" - they want the OGC itself...
especially if you're not close to a FLGS
or if something is out of print
or if what you want is spread across 5 products
or if the OGC is not clearly marked in a product (yes, this IS a problem)
or .... well, you get the idea.

--The Sigil

 

[Michael Sorensen]

Re: My thoughts...

The only thing you have to do is give publishers some "lag time" to sell their products in the first place before they add to the repository, and there is no business reason not to.
--The Sigil

I would say that a lag time of 90-180 days would be sufficient. Recent discussions about book sales at WotC indicate that almost all book sales come within the first 90 days -- though I would give d20 publishers more time because they don't have the marketing engine WotC does behind their new books.

 

[CRG]

I may be in the minority, but I have seen evidence that publishers ARE willing to do this once product sales tail off to next-to-nothing. At this point, IMO, they have little to lose. I will let publishers speak for themselves, but I have to think that products like Legions of Hell and the Creature Collection (vol I) really don't sell too much any more.

I can agree with the fact that once things get to this point there is little to loose. I still don't see many companies focusing time or money on this when they are trying to produce products that sell and bring in money. I'd guess that the smaller or more open-minded larger groups would participate at this point, but the ones with the more serious cost/performance constraints won't have the time to devote - unless they enable their employees to do what they want in their free time with it.

Mox nix...It'd be a neat thing to see if/when it occurs.

 

[The Sigil]

Any chance...

Any chance we can get some "big boy" publishers to weigh in with thoughts?

--The Sigil

 

[smetzger]

heh this topic won't go away, will it?

If you want to do it go ahead and do it. Some will hate you for it. Some will love you for it. Some will figure out a way to make money off of it. It will be legal.

So, quite wastin' time on the boards and go do it.