Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
OGL To Be Renamed Game System License (GSL)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JohnRTroy" data-source="post: 4026791" data-attributes="member: 2732"><p>A game system is not "code" to be "re-used". It's not the GPL.</p><p></p><p>d20 can do a lot, but I don't think it can do everything. The ones that "stretch" the system aren't really d20, can you really mix M&M, Spycraft, Arcana Unearthed, and D&D together without SOME conversion?</p><p></p><p>"Mandate sharing of material"--how much of that was really done? I think most publishers did their own thing, and didn't make a lot of cross-compatible products. The virus was mostly D&D to their own campaign setting or variant PHB. WoTC stopped creating OGL stuff outside of a few books. </p><p></p><p>Honestly, it was a great experiment. But I think it was a failure. WoTC primary market is selling "core books". The PHB has always sold more than the supplements. I think it was mentioned while Millions PHBs were sold, only 300,000 of the FR 3e Campaign Setting were sold. This has always been true--Gary Gygax once mentioned millions of D&D players but only 100,000 subscribed to Dragon magazine. Having the rules on-line may have hurt sales. I even suggested maybe the best thing to do with Unearthed Arcana would be not to convert it to on-line format, since I thought that the best way to reward WoTC for doing that would be to buy the book and show that you'd publish it.</p><p></p><p>No other major publisher has adopted a similar method for their created game systems--White Wolf hasn't opened the Storyteller System, Steve Jackson hasn't opened GURPS, etc. If the concept of open gaming is so great, wouldn't other publishers have followed suit?</p><p></p><p>And for those that still believe in the OGL, continue using the third game! Honestly, the people who are complaining the most are those who wanted 4e open. Wizards has said "no, it's not". So, if your primary goal is to support open gaming, using 3e INSTEAD OF 4e. It'll keep at least one thing I liked about the OGL--keeping a form of D&D alive if the parent company died.</p><p></p><p>Trying to "reverse engineer" 4e is just going to prove some hypocrisies. It's Wizards choice to use a different license system. I don't think there would be an ethical way to "reverse engineer" it. Granted, you might be able to legally do this. However, I'd personally take a dim view of a publisher that decided to do that. Wizards has their own license which (hopefully) allow you to keep your own product identity, so using anything other than the GSL would no be required. And unlike OSRIC, you're not trying to support a "dead" game with no license. </p><p></p><p>If you're trying to do something "completely different", why even bother making it 4e compatible? The question is, since (a) Wizards is offering a license and (b) those using the existing OGL can still use the 3e game, why would somebody like Green Ronin decide to upgrade M&M to be 4e compatible.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, what I think will happen is that instead of trying to make 4e compatible cames, you'll see more game companies come up with truly original ideas and not try to make many minor variations of the same ruleset. Those that make major changes could just as well create their own new games. Why make a knockoff of D&D when you can create your own game? With the d20 glut, I have a feeling people would rather get a totally new thing than another umpteeth edition of D&D.</p><p></p><p>I honestly think this is a good thing, the market had much more creativity before the d20 animal, and we lost some of that "bio-diversity" when everybody rushed into the d20 market. Now, we'll have those people who are cool with the more restrictive license who want to suppliement WoTC products or produce their own settings. And, we'll see more creative games.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Technically, D&D is not derived from the SRD, the SRD is derived from D&D. D&D itself isn't subject to the OGL.</p><p></p><p>But even if so, I believe one of the major reasons for changing the whole "fluff" or background is to make elements of D&D require WoTC. The new planes, world like the Feywild and Shadowfell, new creatures, the new cosmology, etc. The key thing is to make the new elements so integrated with the game and so desirable that you'll want to use the GSL. I'll bet the GSL allows you to use all the "fluff" in an adventure or supplement, while the OGL will not.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JohnRTroy, post: 4026791, member: 2732"] A game system is not "code" to be "re-used". It's not the GPL. d20 can do a lot, but I don't think it can do everything. The ones that "stretch" the system aren't really d20, can you really mix M&M, Spycraft, Arcana Unearthed, and D&D together without SOME conversion? "Mandate sharing of material"--how much of that was really done? I think most publishers did their own thing, and didn't make a lot of cross-compatible products. The virus was mostly D&D to their own campaign setting or variant PHB. WoTC stopped creating OGL stuff outside of a few books. Honestly, it was a great experiment. But I think it was a failure. WoTC primary market is selling "core books". The PHB has always sold more than the supplements. I think it was mentioned while Millions PHBs were sold, only 300,000 of the FR 3e Campaign Setting were sold. This has always been true--Gary Gygax once mentioned millions of D&D players but only 100,000 subscribed to Dragon magazine. Having the rules on-line may have hurt sales. I even suggested maybe the best thing to do with Unearthed Arcana would be not to convert it to on-line format, since I thought that the best way to reward WoTC for doing that would be to buy the book and show that you'd publish it. No other major publisher has adopted a similar method for their created game systems--White Wolf hasn't opened the Storyteller System, Steve Jackson hasn't opened GURPS, etc. If the concept of open gaming is so great, wouldn't other publishers have followed suit? And for those that still believe in the OGL, continue using the third game! Honestly, the people who are complaining the most are those who wanted 4e open. Wizards has said "no, it's not". So, if your primary goal is to support open gaming, using 3e INSTEAD OF 4e. It'll keep at least one thing I liked about the OGL--keeping a form of D&D alive if the parent company died. Trying to "reverse engineer" 4e is just going to prove some hypocrisies. It's Wizards choice to use a different license system. I don't think there would be an ethical way to "reverse engineer" it. Granted, you might be able to legally do this. However, I'd personally take a dim view of a publisher that decided to do that. Wizards has their own license which (hopefully) allow you to keep your own product identity, so using anything other than the GSL would no be required. And unlike OSRIC, you're not trying to support a "dead" game with no license. If you're trying to do something "completely different", why even bother making it 4e compatible? The question is, since (a) Wizards is offering a license and (b) those using the existing OGL can still use the 3e game, why would somebody like Green Ronin decide to upgrade M&M to be 4e compatible. Honestly, what I think will happen is that instead of trying to make 4e compatible cames, you'll see more game companies come up with truly original ideas and not try to make many minor variations of the same ruleset. Those that make major changes could just as well create their own new games. Why make a knockoff of D&D when you can create your own game? With the d20 glut, I have a feeling people would rather get a totally new thing than another umpteeth edition of D&D. I honestly think this is a good thing, the market had much more creativity before the d20 animal, and we lost some of that "bio-diversity" when everybody rushed into the d20 market. Now, we'll have those people who are cool with the more restrictive license who want to suppliement WoTC products or produce their own settings. And, we'll see more creative games. Technically, D&D is not derived from the SRD, the SRD is derived from D&D. D&D itself isn't subject to the OGL. But even if so, I believe one of the major reasons for changing the whole "fluff" or background is to make elements of D&D require WoTC. The new planes, world like the Feywild and Shadowfell, new creatures, the new cosmology, etc. The key thing is to make the new elements so integrated with the game and so desirable that you'll want to use the GSL. I'll bet the GSL allows you to use all the "fluff" in an adventure or supplement, while the OGL will not. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
OGL To Be Renamed Game System License (GSL)
Top