Wizards: Musings on the new DDi disaster

[TerraDave]

You know, this is a great point. There was so much negativity around the time of the Gleemax debalce, yet look how well the DDI Compendium and the (offline) Character Builder turned out!

TerraDave, thanks for reminding us that the sky isn't falling.

Remember the CD that came with the release of the 3.0 PHB?

Things like this go back to T$R.

It has always been this way and will always be this way.

 

[Sunseeker]

Game rules aren't copyrightable.

Wizard's doesn't create the backstory's for any of my characters, I do. I generally store that information on the character sheet I use. I've created things from 'me Ugh the Barbarian' to 6 page family histories on characters I've created.
Nor do they own 'deva' as a concept because it's been around much longer than D&D.

And no, they wouldn't be legally within their rights to any of it if I create something. What I referred to was a change in the Terms of Service/Use of their forums a few years back during the Gleemax start. One of them specifically stated on owning it all on their forums if you posted it and agreed to the new ToS when you logged in.
So I would advise anyone using the Online CB to carefully read the ToS they have for your information you put in. Especially those of you talking about putting your houseruled information into it.

Their actions won't really affect me much as I won't be using it. Me and the deadtrees will do just fine on our own.

How is the air up there?

Uh, no.

Ah, US copyright law, your failure to understand it makes me giggle, and also makes me sad.

And I quote, WotC Terms of Use
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page (Terms of Use)

By posting or submitting any User Content to or through the Sites or Services, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such User Content, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.

Enjoy giving WotC your characters.

 

[jbear]

See, you're not even open to discussion of that decision. You came in here, with no intent to add to the discussion just to say "bye!"

And in reality, no, you can't play D&D without 4e. Oh yes, YOU don't have to use the 4e system, but lets face it, it's much easier to find a 4e game than a 3.x, a 2e, or 1e game.

Why? Because those games are out of production for starters. Because new players aren't being exposed to them on a regular basis. Because new players can't buy books for them readily. I know several people who'd like to do a 2e game, except that none of them even live in the same state.

No, you don't need to play the latest edition, but you NEED Wizards to keep making D&D.

He doesn't need to discuss his decision with you. Who are you or any of us to change his mind?

But sharing his feelings on the issue and how it has affected his decision is valid enough whether you share them or understand them in the slightest.

I understand your point about the exagerated nature of some of the complaints made against WotC. I often feel the same way.

Unfortunately this is an issue for people. Whether you or me like it or not.

I just hope they turn the situation on its head as fast as possible.

 

[Shemeska]

And in reality, no, you can't play D&D without 4e. Oh yes, YOU don't have to use the 4e system, but lets face it, it's much easier to find a 4e game than a 3.x, a 2e, or 1e game.

I'm not so sure that's the case, or that you could so easily make that claim as being an obvious thing. You would have to assume that the bulk of prior edition players play 4e, and it also omits that 3.x by way of the OGL and Pathfinder is still in production and still exposing new players to that edition and its progeny (to say nothing of established gaming groups introducing new players to various other editions).

 

[Scribble]

Actually a better explanation of it is the old CB format allowed me to partake in a 4E game, where I otherwised shunned it. The ruleset isn't for me overall.
Your right they lose no money on myself over this, they lost it a couple years ago in my case.

Sure- and from others a couple of years before that... No system is perfect for everyone.

In my case it is an example of how sharing of the CB gained a player for a 4E game rather than that player just not playing at all.
My group I had just joined knew I wasn't a fan of 4E, they wanted to play a game of it to try one of the modules (they all play in other games mostly other systems).
Rather than just not playing (I only game once a week) for the couple of months of 4e they played, I gave it a shot using the 4e. They asked for my feed back on the various things. I told them what I liked and what I disliked about it. (not going into those as it takes away from the topic)
The point being using the CB allowed for a grognard like myself to play, enjoy the game, not be too caught up into the rule changes.
Where we play there isn't a good internet connection and generally we don't have laptops at the table, so being able to share the character back and forth allowed for updates to be done easily and allowed the DM to easily have a character copy in the event someone couldn't make it that night.

Fair enough... I won't try to argue the offline CB was useful to people... All in all though I think more games are tried out simply because a group of friends wants to try them out, as opposed to the tools.

See that's the main point, old format, your CB character is yours for life however you store it/maintain it.
New online format, there isn't a thing that says:
"January 1, 2011 - WotC announces they are releasing 5e on January 2, 2011."
And they simply flip the switch on the Online CB for 4.0 to 5.0.

Not a thing you can do about it except pop online and rant and rave.
Old CB format, you simple say ok, no more updates, all my information is safely stored on my system. Maybe I'll give the new one a try.

I would hope they are smart enough though to have lead time on the information for those using it, or allow support of multiple editions as they move forward.

Well- sure this same thing can happen if gmail suddenly decides to close up shop. I'm not really worried about it personally... Despite WoTC doing some stuff that seems pretty mismanaged. When the time comes, and they switch over, if they give no notice... meh- I'll get upset then.

 

[TheYeti1775]

Ah, US copyright law, your failure to understand it makes me giggle, and also makes me sad.

And I quote, WotC Terms of Use
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page (Terms of Use)


Enjoy giving WotC your characters.

Originally Posted by WotC Terms of Use Section 7: User Content
By posting or submitting any User Content to or through the Sites or Services, you hereby irrevocably grant to Wizards, its affiliates and sublicensees, a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, non-exclusive, and fully sub-licensable license, to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such User Content (in whole or in part) in any media and to incorporate the User Content into other works in any format or medium now known or later developed. The foregoing grants shall include the right to exploit any proprietary rights in such User Content, including but not limited to rights under copyright, trademark, service mark or patent laws under any relevant jurisdiction.

shidaku,
Thanks for proving my point of the Terms of Service.
The quoted portion ot the ToS is what I was talking about if you post on WotC or 'save in their online CB' it belongs to them.
Not many ever really read it, just simple click and move on.

Far as the Copyright's:
Have you ever wonder why so many different versions of games are out there? It's because GAME RULES are non-copyrightable, I'm not referring to IP which would be the concepts like Beholders and all. It's referring to the hard numbers of Armor #2 (Chain Shirt) gives you a +4 to your Armor Defense.

 

[P1NBACK]

See, you're not even open to discussion of that decision. You came in here, with no intent to add to the discussion just to say "bye!"

No. I came in here with the intent to say, "Right on" to MerricB. ... Back the up.

@Scribble - I'm saying I'm jaded with 4E and I'm not interested in trying Essentials, despite me liking what I've seen, because of the D&DI debacle and it's reflection on the company as a whole. Secondly, 4E's system is far too exhaustive for me to put the time in to do this by hand. I'm a busy man. I'll just play low-prep games like Apocalypse World. If you're going to design a system that damn near requires software to use it all, well, then don't botch the software. Third, I'm not saying I'll never play 4E ever. It's just not worth investing in to me anymore. I very well may DM a one-shot with Essentials only. I don't know. I can't tell the future. But, it's certainly not sounding appetizing to me right now.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ah, US copyright law, your failure to understand it makes me giggle, and also makes me sad.

And I quote, WotC Terms of Use
Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page (Terms of Use)


Enjoy giving WotC your characters.

As an entertainment lawyer, I giggle back.

No US copyright case has ever been decided solely on the strength of the boilerplate in a ToS agreement. In fact, boilerplate between parties to a contract who are demonstrably of radically unequal bargaining power is generally either interpreted most strictly against the contract drafter or ignored altogether.

I'm not saying to ignore such language, just don't get too scared by it.

 

[Scribble]

I'm saying I'm jaded with 4E and I'm not interested in trying Essentials, despite me liking what I've seen, because of the D&DI debacle and it's reflection on the company as a whole. Secondly, 4E's system is far too exhaustive for me to put the time in to do this by hand. I'm a busy man. I'll just play low-prep games like Apocalypse World. If you're going to design a system that damn near requires software to use it all, well, then don't botch the software. Third, I'm not saying I'll never play 4E ever. It's just not worth investing in to me anymore. I very well may DM a one-shot with Essentials only. I don't know. I can't tell the future. But, it's certainly not sounding appetizing to me right now.

[MENTION=83768]P1NBACK[/MENTION] Fair enough! Really I was just interested in your logic.

 

[Umbran]

Enjoy giving WotC your characters.

It's legal boilerplate. Many or most online applications that accept content from users have some such thing, to defend themselves from any number of future unforeseen circumstances.

It is a significant defense against convergent development, which is not at all unlikely in a small field: You put something in the CB. WotC independently developed something similar to your content. You cannot make claims that they used your content without permission.

There's a certain... arrogance to the idea that there is some significant risk that WotC is going to actually take your stuff and use it and make scads of money off it and leave you in the cold. I mean, really?