Forked Thread: What is WOTC's Goal with the GSL?

[Ranger REG]

I do think that the proliferation of "variant SRDs" is evidence that Dancey's idea that the d20 system would grow D&D sales was not flawless.

Last I checked, there weren't a lot of variant SRDs. Oh, there were a few OGL-based products and product lines. But the last time a company puts out their own SRD, it went under.

Well, as I said above, WoTC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of a publicly-listed company. It is not a charity. So I think it is unrealistic to expect it to compromise its own sales in order to further the sales of 3pps.

How does cleverly using 3PP OGC in one's product compromise its own sale?

This doesn't mean that WoTC wants 3pps "out of its sandbox". If they wanted that, they wouldn't release a GSL.

The GSL makes the sandbox feel uninviting. It's like I'm inviting you to my house but you and your beautiful girlfriend must first strip nude and submit to a cavity search, and must wear ball muzzles while inside. Does that sound inviting to you?*

*If it does, let's talk about having a "safe word"

 

[Corjay]

Last I checked, there weren't a lot of variant SRDs. Oh, there were a few OGL-based products and product lines. But the last time a company puts out their own SRD, it went under.



How does cleverly using 3PP OGC in one's product compromise its own sale?



The GSL makes the sandbox feel uninviting. It's like I'm inviting you to my house but you and your beautiful girlfriend must first strip nude and submit to a cavity search, and must wear ball muzzles while inside. Does that sound inviting to you?*

*If it does, let's talk about having a "safe word"

I believe he is speaking in post revision terms. When you take out the problem areas, what he is saying is how it looks like it should work. The problem areas really just have to do with WOTC's controlling the license (see my sig). Those problems have nothing to do with how the loss leader dynamics work out. Pemerton seems to be referring solely to those dynamics, not the control aspect. Just pretend WOTC were a company with no ill intent and you can see what he's saying.

Also, I think he meant variant OGL's, not variant SRD's.

 

[Ranger REG]

Also, I think he meant variant OGL's, not variant SRD's.

I haven't seen many variant Open Gaming Licenses either.

I'm trying to give WotC the benefit of the doubt, but where they (along with you) believe the OGL is flawed, I'm of the opposite. The fact that there are many 3P products out there made me appreciate WotC and their 3e game book products even more, but I guess you can't convert appreciation into dollar signs.

Nevertheless, because I'm more of a d20 gamer than a D&D fan these days, I have to wait until WotC release something similar to a d20 Modern game book in a year or two, to be followed by yet a new version of the GSL. We'll see if that allows 3PP to play in WotC's sandbox.

BTW, pemerton, I'm still waiting if your gf wants a "safe-word."

 

[Corjay]

Nevertheless, because I'm more of a d20 gamer than a D&D fan these days, I have to wait until WotC release something similar to a d20 Modern game book in a year or two, to be followed by yet a new version of the GSL. We'll see if that allows 3PP to play in WotC's sandbox.

You won't need to wait that long. They are currently revising the GSL. I think they'll correct the problem. As was pointed out earlier, they didn't create the GSL just to be rejected. They created it for the benefit of 3pp's. It's quite possible the control aspects were due to an over-zealous lawyer. Even if not, I think they'll get the message that such control is anti-conducive to attracting 3pp's. You'll be seeing a much improved GSL sooner than later.

 

[pemerton]

I think you are misinterpreting Dancey's ideas. Primarily because I recall Mr Dancey claiming that by allowing different d20 games other than D&D would grow the entire RPG pie.

That's not quite what I remember him saying - his talk of "network externalities" tended to refer to variant settings rather than variant mechanics, as far as I recall - he seemed to hope that mechanics would become unified around the market's preferred alternatives, without canvassing that the market might prefer a diversity of mechanics. But I didn't read everything he wrote on the topic, so I might be reading too much into those things I did read.

Last I checked, there weren't a lot of variant SRDs.

Off the top of my head, here's a list: Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, Conan OGL, Iron Heroes, WoW. Everquest also, I think. It's probably a stretch to put True20 and C&C under this label, but maybe not a big stretch.

How does cleverly using 3PP OGC in one's product compromise its own sale?

I never suggested that it did. But the notion that the 3pps were a great design and dvelopment service for WoTC of which WoTC never took rational advantage is (in my view) not all that plausible.

Even the notion that it gave a high degree of support for designers/developers to poach is not all that plausible either. As I think I noted above, TSR was able to take Monte Cook from ICE, which is really no different to WoTC taking Mearls from Malhavoc.

The GSL makes the sandbox feel uninviting.

Well, obviously that's a matter of opinion. Goodman and Expeditious Retreat didn't agree. And it's being revised. If WoTC didn't want 3pps, they wouldn't faff around with a licence. The suggestion that the GSL is a big ploy to hose 3pps is worse than nonsense, in my opinion.

they didn't create the GSL just to be rejected.

Utterly agreed. That this even has to be said shows that something is wrong with the whole GSL debate.

I think he meant variant OGL's

Actually I meant "variants of the d20 SRD" - that is, new games which are variations on D&D. I've listed some above. These games proved to be quite popular. I don't think that Dancey anticipated or intended this. He wanted uniform mechanics (perhaps with supplements, but not variations) to support multiple settings and genres. My view is that the market has shown that it rejects this notion. Even within the roughly simulationist segment of the market, different mechanics support different simulations (eg Arcana Unearthed magic system vs Iron Heroes magic system). In may view, this is Forge 1-Dancey 0. Which is not to say that Dancey was wrong about other things - just this thing.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I think there's a point of confusion here. There are a number of OGL games that were published. None of them have an SRD (System Reference Document) where you can go get the rules and search the rules online. PDFs don't count because you have to download these. Now there are some fan-started wikis and things like that for some OGL games, but there are no true SRD variants out there.

 

[pemerton]

I don't think there's any confusion - I've used the phrase "variant SRD" multiple times in this thread, making it pretty clear each time that by "variant SRD" I mean a published game that is, mechanically, a variant on the d20 SRD. My point about these games is that show that, contrary to what Ryan Dancey predicted, the existence of an OGL has not created a trend towards uniformity of mechanics. In fact, as these games illustrate, it has become one source of a diversity of mechanics.

 

[Corjay]

I don't think there's any confusion - I've used the phrase "variant SRD" multiple times in this thread, making it pretty clear each time that by "variant SRD" I mean a published game that is, mechanically, a variant on the d20 SRD. My point about these games is that show that, contrary to what Ryan Dancey predicted, the existence of an OGL has not created a trend towards uniformity of mechanics. In fact, as these games illustrate, it has become one source of a diversity of mechanics.

I didn't fully understand it in the context, so maybe it's not as clear as you think. My first thought was that you meant SRD's for entirely different systems (taking the "varied" aspect in the broadest sense). "Variant d20 SRD" would be a lot clearer.

 

[Ranger REG]

Off the top of my head, here's a list: Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, Conan OGL, Iron Heroes, WoW. Everquest also, I think. It's probably a stretch to put True20 and C&C under this label, but maybe not a big stretch.

Apparently, you mean SRD- or OGL-based products. As I still maintained, there are few System Reference Documents outside of WotC's own.

 

[Ranger REG]

I don't think there's any confusion - I've used the phrase "variant SRD" multiple times in this thread, making it pretty clear each time that by "variant SRD" I mean a published game that is, mechanically, a variant on the d20 SRD. My point about these games is that show that, contrary to what Ryan Dancey predicted, the existence of an OGL has not created a trend towards uniformity of mechanics. In fact, as these games illustrate, it has become one source of a diversity of mechanics.

Sorry, but variant SRD is variant SRD, such as the d20 Mecha and d20 Anime SRDs, freely provided by Guardians of Order.