D&D 4E Rumor control: Lucca 4e seminar report inaccuracies

[Najo]

Hey, least I quoted my poor source.. a poor source that claimed to be quoting a trade magazine...

In any case, you numbers show just how small our hobby is.

Now, back to the topic at hand: What is the benefit to WotC to release their design documents to 3rd party publishers? (I know it would benefit 3rd party publishers greatly... I concede that easily)

When the pie is a small one I'm sure you want to keep the majority to yourself without handing your competitors the tools to grab a larger slice. They already allow third parties use of the SRD via the OGL. How does giving away the secret formula benefit WotC?

1) WOTC can charge liscensing fees. This becomes a revenue source.

2) Giving support from design documents doesn't give away the full "formula". WOTC still has the best talent and resources to make the best products. It just evens the playing field for new designers coming in to show their stuff.

3) Quality control helps the OGL/ D20 movement. Which in turn helps WOTC by providing quality support material that is not worth WOTC doing. Small projects like modules, highly focused campaign settings and specialized splat books are usually not worth WOTC's time. Let the 3rd party publishers do this stuff to the best of their ability.

4) Innovation comes out of the 3rd party publishers as much as WOTC, if not even more so. Giving them tools to do the best they can only helps the OGL movement. WOTC can use those publishers as test beds for ideas that are to risky for them to move their whole staff on.

Now, playing my own devil's advocate. I agree with one point you've made. Why would WOTC want to do this? They do benefit from 3rd party publishers making lesser products as it only makes their own products look better. Giving up the design documents does give the 3rd parties an edge they don't currently have.

I would think there is a place for WOTC to share this with liscensing though, and it would be worth it for both sides.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

What a train wreck.

 

[Najo]

What a train wreck.

Why do you honestly feel this is not worth discussing or pursuing? Why be so negative about this?

 

[tenkar]

Why do you honestly feel this is not worth discussing or pursuing? Why be so negative about this?

I'll hazard a guess. Wulf might feel that WotC has spoken and it is too late in the game for them to change gears. Maybe he'd rather put his energy into figuring how best to publish under the new situation then tilt at windmills.

Najo, in a perfect world where every publisher is not looking to secure then own position and what works best for them your scenario might not only work but might also benefit the industry on a whole.

The added work and responsibility WotC would have to take upon itself under your plan (even with income from licensing fees) is apparently not in their self interest (from my perspective... your perspective may differ).

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I'll hazard a guess. Wulf might feel that WotC has spoken... Maybe he'd rather put his energy into figuring how best to publish under the new situation..

Feel free to speak for me. Your Diplomacy score is obviously higher. I put all my skill ranks into Practical Experience and Firm Grasp on Reality.

 

[tenkar]

Feel free to speak for me. Your Diplomacy score is obviously higher. I put all my skill ranks into Practical Experience and Firm Grasp on Reality.

LOL... My job has me practicing my Diplomacy Skill on a daily basis. Keeping it high makes my day oh so much easier

Practical experience is also an important skill to put points in, but isn't Firm Grasp on Reality more like a dump stat when it comes to gamers?

 

[metajock]

Scott, this question is directed to you, please:

Fact: There is no 4E D20. Period.

Fact: There will be a 4E OGL.

Fact: They cannot repeal/revoke the 3.5E OGL.

Fact: They did repeal/revoke the 3E D20 when they came out with the 3.5E D20.

Assumption: They will repeal/revoke the 3.5E D20, as they did with 3E.

Questions:

1) What will happen to all those products that already exist with the D20 logo on them?

--- Will all the books in the warehouses have to be returned? Destroyed?

--- Will the hobbyshops be expected to remove them from sale?

--- Will all the companies with .pdf products, large and small alike, have to remove them from sale from the web? (ENWorld/DTRPG/RPGNow, E23, YourGamesNow, Monte Cook, Green Ronin, and Goodman Games, to name just a few...)

--- Will there be a possiblity of D20 products being banned from sale on Ebay, as the licence has been formally revoked?

2) Will companies no longer be able to support the existing customer base's products?

3) Will all the websites that cater to the all the D20 customers be expected to delete and/or edit their content? What about those sites who acutally use "D20" in their domain name?

This might sound paranoid, but everything here is a solid possiblity.

(Edited for mah poor grammer. I ain't a gud spellin' type...)

 

[Najo]

Feel free to speak for me. Your Diplomacy score is obviously higher. I put all my skill ranks into Practical Experience and Firm Grasp on Reality.

I think you make alot of assumptions. I also don't appreciate your stabs you are taking at me. I don't want a rift between us, but your being unecessarily hostile. This is surprising considering you represent a business that wants to win over retailers, not alienate them. My wife and I own one of the strongest gaming stores in the industry right now, and have been running it successfully for 13 years. I am not speaking out of my ass with industry numbers, nor my ideas. I have done years of research to understand our industry and learn how it fits into the bigger picture of mainstream games and IP. Wulf, I am goin to please ask you to be respectful and stop trying to twist this discussion into something its not.

Second, WOTC isn't done with the 4e OGL/ D20 agreement yet. Things can still change. If I didn't speak my mind, then those ideas are not out there potentially. It is people standing up, saying what they feel needs to be said and following through with action that changes the world. Not rolling over and accepting fate with 'Practical Experience' and a "Firm Grasp on Reality'. Scott seems like a reasonable fellow, and it is possible to present ideas for him and his team to think over.

 

[Najo]

I'll hazard a guess. Wulf might feel that WotC has spoken and it is too late in the game for them to change gears. Maybe he'd rather put his energy into figuring how best to publish under the new situation then tilt at windmills.

I understand that. More the reason to allow a retailer as myself to speak up and let him deal with his own business, while I deal with mine.

Najo, in a perfect world where every publisher is not looking to secure then own position and what works best for them your scenario might not only work but might also benefit the industry on a whole.

This business model works with video game consoles. Amature products created under an OGL or D20 only make D&D look bad. Why not give publishers tools to improve? If WOTC truely wants to allow 3rd party publishers to be compatible, then they should give the tools to allow those 3rd party publishers to truely be compatible and trust that their own name, art team, game designers, graphic design and marketing department is what puts them above the competition.

The added work and responsibility WotC would have to take upon itself under your plan (even with income from licensing fees) is apparently not in their self interest (from my perspective... your perspective may differ).

It is not adding anything to their work load. They charge a fee, they give you rights to brand under the D20 logo and share the game design docs that are current at the time. Very simple. WOTC doesn't edit your product, they don't police it any more than now, they don't publish it for you, nothing like that. They just share their documents they are keeping in hosue right now, thats all.

 

[Najo]

Scott, this question is directed to you, please:

Fact: There is no 4E D20. Period.

Fact: There will be a 4E OGL.

Fact: They cannot repeal/revoke the 3.5E OGL.

Fact: They did repeal/revoke the 3E D20 when they came out with the 3.5E D20.

Assumption: They will repeal/revoke the 3.5E D20, as they did with 3E.

Questions:

1) What will happen to all those products that already exist with the D20 logo on them?

--- Will all the books in the warehouses have to be returned? Destroyed?

--- Will the hobbyshops be expected to remove them from sale?

--- Will all the companies with .pdf products, large and small alike, have to remove them from sale from the web? (ENWorld/DTRPG/RPGNow, E23, YourGamesNow, Monte Cook, Green Ronin, and Goodman Games, to name just a few...)

--- Will there be a possiblity of D20 products being banned from sale on Ebay, as the licence has been formally revoked?

2) Will companies no longer be able to support the existing customer base's products?

3) Will all the websites that cater to the all the D20 customers be expected to delete and/or edit their content? What about those sites who acutally use "D20" in their domain name?

This might sound paranoid, but everything here is a solid possiblity.

(Edited for mah poor grammer. I ain't a gud spellin' type...)

Metajock, I think I luv ya

@Wulf: see this is the sort of thing that comes out of these discussions. Sounds like revoking the d20 liscense could impact your business. Maybe this is something we should figure out a solution too instead of telling me how dumb my idea is.

Metajock,

Either WOTC Is going to have to keep the d20 liscense for 3.5 as is or they are going to have to create a new one. The other option is to revoke the liscense and then turn a blind eye to the products out there, but then that hurts their ability to enforce legal action if they need to take it. They could put a date stating that the liscense only applies to products released on or before that date, and anything afterwards cannot benefit from the liscense.

One of the issues I see is by moving forward and changing one part and removing another part you end up with unseen sitautions like this.

Scott, I second what Metajock is asking and would like to know how changing the license affects current publishers and their materials on the market?