D&D 5E 5E and the OGL

[I'm A Banana]

I certainly believe that they are capable of hitting a "middle ground" that doesn't include an OGL.

However, I am not sure what they have to gain from that.

D&D enmeshes itself in public domain works from the word "Siren." D&D is based on game mechanics which themselves are thankfully open. D&D doesn't have much of anything "unique" to sell in the content of its books. It's all mechanics and advice and nothing in there is something that is going to be your next Transformers.

By NOT going OGL, they gain a pile of ill will and enmity, and a system that receives anemic outside support to boot. They might be willing to put up with that in exchange for...

What, exactly?

They might decide not to do it anyway, since corporate entities are usually control freaks with a suspicion of innovation, but at that point it's not really a decision based on what is the best for D&D, but on impossible hypothetical and lawyer paranoia.

Meanwhile, if they do the OGL, they gain a much larger pile of good will, and a system that receives a tremendous amount of outside support. They stand a real chance of getting Pathfinder and OSR players to pick up a 5e PHB or DMG, or even a brand new 1e adventure they're publishing simply for a lark or something.

On a reasonable cost/benefit analysis, it seems like the benefits of doing it certainly outweigh the costs of doing it, and the benefits of not doing it are vague at best, while the costs of not doing it are very real and have been born out over the last three years.

It seems to be rather smart business.

If it wasn't, I don't think rather large, multi-million dollar companies like CryTek or Epic or Valve would give away their dev kits for free to encourage people to make games with them.

Giving stuff away is the best way in this day and age to earn BUCKETS of money. Facebook is free. Google is free. A lot of iPhone games and apps are free. DDO is free. I see no reason that D&D can't be free.

WotC still can sell books (very nice books that many will pay to own), and can still sell software (updated earlier and better than the competitors!), and can still own the D&D trademark and brand (arguably the most powerful brand in fantasy gaming!), and can still play in the Forgotten Realms and Eberron and Dark Sun and the Nentir Vale wherever else their marketing team decides might be lucrative, and can still make card games and minis games and board games with their IP, too. And they should.

If you want to cast a big net, and if you want to show that you understand your market, and you want to not have to publish something new on a monthly basis, you can go OGL, and save yourself a lot of headache.

 

[Blackwarder]

Give your SDK for a token amount (100$) per developer license and allow them to get integrated to your own digital tools and digital distribution methods, foreverybook sold via your own store and linked to the tools you take 20% and the publisher take 80%.

Personally, I think that WotC should take it one step further and start working right now on the D&D equivalent of iBook author and start publishing the edition with mobile devices in mind from the get go, we currently got two iPads and three iPhones around our gaming table and it will grow to five iPads in the coming year and the prevalence of mobile devices is on,y going to grow.

I will be willing to buy the three core books as an iPad app with easily cross referenced rules and periodically errata changes (I'll probably also buy the dead tree version of the core books but that because I collect them, my players probably won't buy them).

Warder

 

[MatthewJHanson]

Someone correct me if I am not remembering correctly, but wasn't a requirement of the 4e license that they not put out new materials for the 3.5 game in order to get the best licensing? If that is/was the case, that needs to be done away with if they want some of the best adventure designers in the business, with a loyal following already built in.

There was originally, but after much complaining it was removed. (Though too late for many companies).

 

[Janaxstrus]

There was originally, but after much complaining it was removed. (Though too late for many companies).

Thank you for the update. I thought I remembered that, but I didn't want to state it as gospel

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

I have to ask, how many rpg companies, no scratch that, how many companies have ogl like things that lets other companies use there work for free forever?

It was ok, heck it got me my mutants and masterminds, and my stargate games I love, but what does it do for wotc?

If wotc put out a license that was 3 tiers $100/$500/$1000 allowing for diffrent level of access and a term of 5 years that still sounds generous.

I would hat to see 6e having to fight a retro clone of 5e as hard as 4e fights pathfinder.

 

[triqui]

The more devoted fans are the ones that drive the hobby. They're the ones that have the most influence with what games their groups play (especially since the most dedicated person at the table is probably the one running the games). They're the ones introducing new players to their game of choice and expanding the hobby. They're the ones responsible for the sense of community that surrounds a game and a game company, they're the ones responsible for the tenor of the conversation. Positivity in the community spills out into the wider players base, but so does vitriol.

I think that's the wishful thinking of the devoted fan who wants to think he is important to his hobby, insead of just one extra face in the mob.

You are right in that the most vocal ones can change the tenor of the conversation. But "do like I want, or I'll be spouting bile in the internet against you" shouldn't be a reason to hear.

I hope WotC goes with OGL. But I honestly doubt it's a good idea for them. OGL created the company that is killing them, which might not be the greatest idea as a bussiness model. Do I enjoy of it as a customer? Sure. I like Paizo's game. I like variety and diversity. But would I be happy if I were Hasbro shareholder? That's a different issue.

 

[Alzrius]

OGL created the company that is killing them, which might not be the greatest idea as a bussiness model.

People talk about this like it was some sort of inevitability that the OGL would bring about a major, direct competitor to WotC. In fact, while that is what happened, it was by no means a given.

Leaving aside questions of how much of its status as the "industry leader" that WotC has lost in the last few years, back when Fourth Edition was announced, everyone assumed that the third-party publishers would fall in line behind WotC and publish for 4E if they were allowed to do so - chief among this belief were the third-party publishers themselves, who were eager to keep their products hitched to the newest iteration of the world's most popular fantasy role-playing game.

WotC, however, instead gave the third-parties long periods of silence punctuated by half-finished thoughts. By the time they managed to produce the GSL, the bigger third-party publishers, such as Paizo, had already been forced to go in a different direction just to remain solvent - they simply didn't have the time to wait around and do nothing while WotC made up its mind. That the GSL was more restrictive (and included that awful "non-compete with 3.5" clause in its first release) was just the cherry on the feculent sunday.

Had WotC immediately declared that 4E would be released under the OGL, Paizo and the other big third-parties would have immediately jumped on board the 4E bandwagon. Sure, there would have still been Mutants & Masterminds, d20 Conan, and other "competing" products out there, but it's extremely doubtful that any of them would have risen in such prominence as to challenge 4E on its lofty perch (and heck, some of them might have adopted 4E-style rules of their own).

It was WotC's own inaction in response to the question of open gaming, and not the Open Gaming License, that created the stiff competition they're facing now.

 

[Scribble]

It was WotC's own inaction in response to the question of open gaming, and not the Open Gaming License, that created the stiff competition they're facing now.

A little of both I'd say.

 

[Shadeydm]

OGL created the company that is killing them, which might not be the greatest idea as a bussiness model. Do I enjoy of it as a customer? Sure. I like Paizo's game. I like variety and diversity. But would I be happy if I were Hasbro shareholder? That's a different issue.

Yes, but I imagine a fair argument could be made that WotC leaving the edition and OGL behind played a significant role in the rise of the pathfinder issue. Seems like something of a perfect storm to me.

 

[Croesus]

Gilette thought it an awesome idea to give away the shavers; we pay through the nose for replacement blades, and it makes 'em money. Offer awesome products for free that drive people back to your core products, and you'll make money. Paizo repeatedly says their strategy (Ryan Dancey's strategy, according to Lisa Stevens) makes Paizo successful; their products don't drive people back to D&D, it drives them to the Pathfinder core books. 3rd party publishers are also driving sales to Pathfinder core books.

I'm going to go out on a limb and assume you are comparing the rules to razor blades. Let 3PP's publish extra stuff that gives people a reason to buy the rules. Makes sense and that was at least one of the reasons behind the original OGL.

The problem, of course, is that the original OGL did not limit 3PP's to the extra stuff - they could take the SRD and OGL and produce their own rulesets (those profitable razor blades). These rulesets competed directly with WOTC's rulesets, especially once WOTC chose to move on to 4E.

So for DDN - explain to me how you would craft a new OGL that allows 3PP's to publish extra stuff, but not rulesets? How in the world do you make the rules open source, but also tell folks that they can't publish those rules, or variants of them?

Bottom line, if I'm WOTC, there is absolutely no way I give away the rules again. That's too much like Gillette giving away their blades. Ain't gonna happen.