D&D 5E So, 5e OGL

[Mark CMG]

Back when they were talking to publishers before coming out with the GSL for 4E, I asked flat out if the SRD 3.5 Revised was problematic or part of their decision making process and I was told that it was not. I suspect that the same would hold true for the SRD in compact book form. By that measure, I also suspect that Michael's theory is false conjecture.

As far as Paizo's Pathfinder is concerned, that would never have come about, in all likelihood, if 4E had used a full OGL, and would likely not have been as successful if WotC's business plan didn't regularly cull some of its best, brightest, and highest paid employees, sending them off to places like Paizo in the first place. It's ridiculous to think that the OGL is doing any real damage to WotC and, furthermore, foolish to believe it could not help them to use it again. It's been proven now that the OGL was a tremendous boon to the 3.XE era for WotC and that the GSL was weak sauce and a bad move.

At this point, though, a 5E OGL would probably be too little, too late, too be anywhere near as effective as it could have been had they utilized it during the creation process and right out of the gate. We'll see what they do at this point but I seriously doubt they'll do more than continue to kick the can further down the road.

 

[delericho]

Personally, I blame Mongoose and their Pocket PHB for this. Printing the whole SRD out verbatim poisoned the waters and likely soured Hasbro on the OGL long before 4e came around.

Maybe. I've certainly heard reports that some of the guys in WotC at the time weren't happy about it.

But it's worth noting that Ryan Dancey was actually asked about the possibility of something like that back when the OGL was first being put together. His reply was that they were welcome to try.

 

[DaveMage]

There are still no conversion guides.

There is still no license of any kind.

The license thing I can understand - WotC is strategically licensing D&D.

The lack of conversion guides I don't get. The #1 complaint I see about 5E is a lack of product. With a conversion guide that helps you on the fly (especially one for, say, 2E - which shouldn't be that hard), the amount of product available skyrockets since D&D classics is standing by to take your order!

 

[DEFCON 1]

At this point, though, a 5E OGL would probably be too little, too late, too be anywhere near as effective as it could have been had they utilized it during the creation process and right out of the gate. We'll see what they do at this point but I seriously doubt they'll do more than continue to kick the can further down the road.

What metrics are you using to determine what you think is "effective"?

Would a 5E OGL at game's release have resulted in more initial sales of the PH, DMG and MM? Maybe. But were sales at the very top of release what WotC was concerned about? I don't think so.

Would a 5E OGL at game's release have flooded the market with all manner of product thereby rendering any further WotC product over that first and second year getting lost in the shuffle? Maybe. Was WotC concerned about that flooding, especially with regards to blowing up important rules balancing done by people who might not have been fully aware of the consequences? Quite likely.

A 5E OGL would definitely be "more effective" for the 3PP companies to generate more sales for themselves... because people would be more inclined to buy outside of WotC from the very beginning. So I know why you and others wished it could have been that way.

But I'm not so sure how it would have been "effective" for WotC to help support an eight to ten year lifespan of the game. Maybe you can give a reason why it would be, but thus far everyone's reasons why postponing a 5E SRD to Year Two will end up being a bad idea have not convinced me.

 

[Wicht]

Would a 5E OGL at game's release have flooded the market with all manner of product thereby rendering any further WotC product over that first and second year getting lost in the shuffle? Maybe. Was WotC concerned about that flooding, especially with regards to blowing up important rules balancing done by people who might not have been fully aware of the consequences? Quite likely..

Your theory would have more credence if WotC was releasing more material. But their production is slow enough I don't think it would make much difference.

 

[Remathilis]

The lack of conversion guides I don't get. The #1 complaint I see about 5E is a lack of product. With a conversion guide that helps you on the fly (especially one for, say, 2E - which shouldn't be that hard), the amount of product available skyrockets since D&D classics is standing by to take your order!

Methinks the staff is too busy with other projects now (movie consultation, coordinating with GR on OotA/SCAG, and aiding on SCL) to have the time to finish it. At this point, there are lots of fan-conversion systems, and I just don't think its worth WotC's time to to even sketch out guidelines for all the different editions.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Your theory would have more credence if WotC was releasing more material. But their production is slow enough I don't think it would make much difference.

That is the point if they WANT slower release letting an ogl out too soon shoots that in the foot

 

[Wicht]

That is the point if they WANT slower release letting an ogl out too soon shoots that in the foot

But that was not the point being made nor commented on.

Anywho, the idea that WotC's product would get lost in an OGL flood of products is rather silly and history and consumer practices alike show it to be nonsense.

 

[Mark CMG]

Anywho, the idea that WotC's product would get lost in an OGL flood of products is rather silly and history and consumer practices alike show it to be nonsense.

Total nonsense, indeed. Furthermore, the idea that the OGL does any harm to the D&D brand or does not help with WotC sales has been proven false over two editions. The only reason not to use it at this point or with this edition is if you never plan to use it again. It may well be that they are winding down with an intent to sell off the D&D IP. Now that they have the movie rights secure, it is a much more viable option. It's been said time and again that as an RPG it simply doesn't pull enough weight for Hasbro. Perhaps they have now examined most of the avenues the IP can draw revenue and decided it it time to get out of the D&D business.

 

[Jer]

It may well be that they are winding down with an intent to sell off the D&D IP.

Total nonsense indeed. Hasbro does not sell IP. This would be like saying Warner Bros is going to sell off Superman because the comics branch of DC Entertainment makes a minimal profit.

At most Wizards might decide they don't want to publish a tabletop role-playing game anymore. At that point they would license the D&D name out to someone else (likely Paizo) for a profit and someone else would publish it with their review. That's the farthest Hasbro would let go of the D&D brand.

But the D&D brand makes a lot of money away from the tabletop - computer games mostly right now, with the hope of movies in the future. There is a 0% chance of Hasbro letting go of that brand. Because Hasbro does not sell IP.