Search results

True, but it's not just the sales. In mainstream publishing, most magazines are heavily subsidized by the ads. The ads provide most of the income, which is why you see such heavily-discounted subscription offers -- the sale price of the magazine itself is only providing a small part of the...

The problem is (and has always been) that the number of gamers who say that an OGL Magazine would be cool is far, far greater than the number of gamers who would actually purchase said magazine. Believe me, if we (or any other publisher) thought that there was any possible way to launch such a...

Calling for a new batch of questions will almost certainly mean a further delay. Plus, there's also the rather unpleasant possibilities this whole thing raises about WOTC's future attitude towards this site, vis-a-vis their own attempts to kick-start Gleemax..... I mean, fer chrissakes --...

Thank you, Morrus and Piratecat, for your efforts. ....Jeez. Just when I thought there wasn't any possible way for WotC to further screw up this process, they have to go and prove me wrong.

I don't see a compelling reason to use this logo, any more than the half-dozen or more other logos which have been rolled out in similar attempts by other publishers over the past few years.

Fine. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to try to figure out why, then, WotC chose NOT to send the Licensing Manager for the biggest issue surrounding the industry to the ONLY trade show for that industry --- a show where the majority of publishers are in attendance, and where...

Nice. Told (via the previously-quoted forum post, and even more directly via email) to expect communication on Monday. But no, yet again. I guess we should all be in the habit by now of multiplying all GSL-related WotC time estimates by a factor of 4. I mean, sure -- why would they want to...

Does the so-called "poison pill" non-compete clause apply to ALL OGL, or only D&D-based fantasy? (I.E. what if it's based on d20 Modern, d20 Future, or a non-d20 source?)

Most of the commentary and questions posted in threads like these are from non-publishers, and, in fact, from folks who don't particularly have a strong grasp on licensing issues, publishing, or much else beyond some half-formed ideas of what's going on. Given the frustrations brought about by...

If you mean could a publisher declare the 4E-headed material as closed, then yes -- they could. However: 1) All it would take is one publisher to screw this up for the cat to be out of the bag -- and given the number of publishers who, to this day, screw up their implementation of the...

You misunderstand how the license works, if you think that adventures are somehow handled differently than sourcebooks or rules expansions. It doesn't matter -- no matter the product type: No cross-licensed products would be allowed, for the reasons stated. Even if the product in question...

Folks, this is NEVER going to happen. The entire point behind this heavy-handed BS is to avoid cross-pollinating the two licenses -- which having 3E and 4E rules together would absolutely result in. Once the two licenses are mixed like that, a reverse-engineered 4E, released under the...

No, I can understand why they wouldn't want competing versions of the same product, available for either system. They're worried about crossing the two licenses, which would make reverse-engineering 4E under the original OGL pretty much guaranteed. Seriously -- I can understand that. What I...

No, it appears that the unforseen accidental consequence was in the misunderstanding that the OGL = 3E-derivatives. Any system released under the OGL is being blanketed by this. So it's: "Support 4E OR support 3E, Traveller, Runequest, FATE, Fudge, Action!, etc. etc." Which is the problem...

Some of us AREN'T consumers. Some of us are businesses that have had a major part of our operational plans in a constant holding pattern since January, and would just like to know if this all-or-nothing rumor is true or not, so we can get on with our livelihoods. Not asking for legal opinion...

Not all all. The publishers could have issued restrictive declarations of Open Content, sticking only to the minimum amount spelled out in the terms of the license. Some publishers did just that, in fact. The publishers in question (and others) instead chose to fully open their work...

Yeah, call me cynical, but if one of the self-professed architects of the license ("Linae and I (and a lot of other people at WOTC) worked our butts off to get the GSLs done.") can't clearly say that the restriction is on a per-product rather than a company-wide basis.... Well, I'd say that's...

Never mind -- Hyrum beat me to it, by pointing out to Mr. "Name One. Yeah, I thought so." just how mind-boggling wrong he is.

The fact that we haven't had a WotC confirmation of the "company-wide" ultimatum --and, given continued posts on other subjects, it seems a rather purposeful lack of confirmation -- isn't helping things. If it is a company-wide, all-or-nothing choice -- then it further demonstrates that WotC...

http://adamant.rpgnow.com/images/92/55418.jpg Love and Betrayal in the City of Adventure! Adamant Entertainment is proud to present the latest in our new series of officially-licensed adventures set in Freeport: the City of Adventure! Blood of Freeport embroils the player-characters in a...