re: No 4E for Necromancer Games!

[jmucchiello]

I ran a Mutants and Masterminds game for 10 months. I had four player's buy the Mutants and Masterminds rulebook. I had two player's pick up Ultimate Power supplement. I myself purchased the rulebook, the pocket version of the rulebook, the gamemaster's screen, Ultimate Power, the M&M Gamemaster's guide, and several adventures.

No one bought a PHB, a DMG, or MM. No Races of... or Complete... were purchased. WoTC did not make a dime out of my game.

And yet I had character sheets that had Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha. I had feats, I had skill ranks, I have Fort, Ref, and Will. There were DC's and an 18 Strenght meant a +4. And, of course, we rolled a d20. Sure there were changes to the game (really GOOD changes btw), but this was clearly a game based off of dungeons and dragons d20 mechanic. And yet WoTC derived (and would derive) zero cash flow from it. I had several player's who never even played D&D (and still haven't).

If they never played D&D and still haven't. Then WotC was never going to see their money. Did any of the new players ever play D&D? If even one did and bought a PHB, then the OGL did its job. Since you picked M&M over Champions or GURPS Supers or any other supers game, you made them ripe for playing D&D. Not all of them did but who says they won't in the future. More import, you moved from D&D to M&M because the mechanics were familiar. The OGL kept your close to D&D. Again, that's job accomplished.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

I don't think Wizard's - at the moment - would be that upset by the limited number of companies that are using the GSL. The impression I have is that WotC's corporate belief is that the d20 license didn't work and that the OGL wasn't much (or even any) use for them. As far as they're concerned, those licenses were failures. If that's true, then they wouldn't see losing companies that are only interested in the old-style licenses as much of a loss.

A few months ago, lurkinglidda wrote:

We totally recognize that this mutual exclusivity will keep some publishers from joining us in 4E. That's a business decision they need to make, and we respect that.
__________________
Linae Foster
Licensing Manager
Dungeons & Dragons
Wizards of the Coast

I think they are quite prepared to lose some, or maybe even all, of the current 3rd part publishers. New ones willing to use the GSL will replace them. Some already have.

(All IMO, of course.)

 

[DaveMage]

I don't think Wizard's - at the moment - would be that upset by the limited number of companies that are using the GSL.

I think they are quite prepared to lose some, or maybe even all, of the current 3rd part publishers. New ones willing to use the GSL will replace them. Some already have.

I agree - and probably the few 3PPs that have signed on won't mind either if the 3PP pool is smaller this time around.

 

[gargoyle2k7]

Personally, I am going with Pathfinder. I understand your position; you're kind of between a rock and a hard place, and if the future is 4E you should follow it. I think you should release some 3.x material, though, just to keep NG in the forefront. We've got a year until Pathfinder comes out; if you wait that long, many gamers might just forget Necromancer Games... Best of luck to you in either case.

 

[bielmic]

Can't really happen under the GSL.

Those are full of OGC monsters from other sources. XRP could only convert ones they created themselves, otherwise the OGL only authorizes reuse of OGC under the terms of the OGL. Under the GSL XRP can not publish OGC in a GSL product.

wow... that has more acronyms than a tom cruise scientology web video!

 

[Galieo]

Point of Order: WoTC's lawyers, if they are like any other corporate lawyers that I know, have absolutely nothing to do with the policy (read: business) decision behind the GSL. It is the business leaders at WoTC who said, "Hey, Mr./Ms. Attorney, draft up a license agreement that does the following N number of things." Corporate lawyer, "You got it chief." Now, the devil is absolutely in the details and there was undoubtedly some wrangling on how the document should be organized, language, etc., but the overall policy is solely a business decision.

I have seen some of the posters suggest that WoTC's lawyers should do this or that. Trust me, they won't do anything unless the business tells them to change the GSL.

So the question, I think, is: how, if at all, can the community at-large demonstrate to the business leaders at WoTC that a more relaxed GSL will maximize whatever measurement(s) (e.g., revenue, market share, etc.) they and 4E are being judged upon.

 

[see]

Well isn't that a kick in the face? Wasn't Necromancer Games one of the biggest 4E supporters? Didn't they hire a playtester to create 4E products before they could legeally see those rules?

Yep. And now they're returning the Advanced Player Guide back to the author so he can publish it elsewhere.

 

[Scribble]

I think they are quite prepared to lose some, or maybe even all, of the current 3rd part publishers. New ones willing to use the GSL will replace them. Some already have.

(All IMO, of course.)

They did mention a while back that one of the goals with the new license was to help eliminate or shrink the "flood" this time around...

Seems like those that made a name for themselves with, and are heavily invested in the OGL, have less of an incentive to switch to the GSL.

Only time will tell if OGL games can survive without D&D technically being a part of it. (Or if the ability to port your GSL stuff into OGL remains that important.)

At the moment, I kind of get the feeling that e might see some quality products coming out of the GSL. It's a bit stricter so those publishing into it will probably be a bit more vigilant about what they publish, less they incur the wrath of WoTC and a loss of license... But that's just my opinion.




ooooooh conspiracy time... There WAS a "secret" meeting between WoTC and some of the big name companies... It was about how to handle the game license if I remember correctly, where several suggestions were made... What if the secret plan was to come out with a "bad" license which all the big guns would cry foul over, and publicly bash. The Smaller companies see this and think, I'm not getting into that if it's THAT bad... All the while the big guns are genrating products and support material for 4e... Then right around october 1st, WoTC unleashes an "updated" GSL, and low and behold... the big guns love the new license, and are able to "quickly" generate product...

Conspiracy theories are fun!

 

[JoeGKushner]

I have almost all your Monster Geographica books too. I'd love to see some of them go 4e.

Now that's an interesting take as they themselves are made of of other monsters from other companies. Would that use of OGL material make WoTC target anyone using any of those monsters while their own company had not gone forward with the GSL?

 

[MacMathan]

I don't know if you'd consider us (Expeditious Retreat Press) a big publisher, but we're releasing a GSL 4e line called Lands of Darkness.

http://josephbrowning.livejournal.com/

joe b

Not to digress too much as I too would like to see Necro in the 4e game but that XRP is going to 4e is a big deal to me because your stuff was some of the only third party I bought during 3.0/3.5. What is the timeline for LoD?