Search results

See, I disagree. A public, royalty-free license is pretty dang open. There are not alot of those out there for something that is as in demand in its own market sector. It is not "open" in the same way true open gaming is, I will concede that. But they opened up 4E. ANYONE can grab the license...

I know it is bad form to quote yourself, so sorry for that. But I keep coming back to this same premise. Yes, I am mad about the "poison pill" and I think it is shortsighted and I think it was poorly handled and implemented. But I have to put that aside. That's my problem, not theirs. The...

My bad. Understood.

GMS, That SPECIFIC question has not been answered. I didnt ask about MM/Traveller/RQ style products because I dont have any of those. I asked the more generic question of 3E vs. 4E. Of course, because MM/RQ etc support 3E in that they use the OGL and 3E SRD, but perhaps there will be a clause...

Sorry if I was grouchy. :) I was doing the initial work defending Wizards. I remain stedafastly supportive of Scott and Linae. I believe this was a term that had to happen for 4E to be open, or so it appears, as part of the corporate decision making process. I dont agree with it. But bottom...

Yes. And if they go 4E, they cannot support 3E products or OGL produts with further products. Its one or the other. Publishers have to choose--go 4E and abandon your old lines, or stay 3E and give up the chance to support 4e.

Yes, we get it. I wish people would stop posting this. It is so self evident it doesnt need posting evey few pages. Everyone knows: they dont have to do this, it is theirs, they are under no obligation, blah blah blah. Its very generous to share (actually, no it isnt, not when the sharing is...

Would people please not get sidetracked by the whole copyright/antitrust stuff. None of that is remotely applicable here. I am a lawyer. Lets not get sidetracked.

Dont worry. I have been specifically told by Wizards that my arrangement with Paizo is kosher and that I can do 4E and Paizo can do its thing and we are fine. For what its worth, I dont like it one bit either. I'm disappointed that they went this way. I am surprised, too. Clark

I've tried that, since the news. My feeling, at least as to this issue of "choose 4e or 3e" is not changing. I've given up on trying to change that. The inclusion of that term was a complete surprise to me, and I have a funny feeling Wizards knew it would be :) My hope is there will be some...

GM, It is. I dont know the full paramaters. But we will have to choose on a company by company basis, not a product by product basis, or so I have been specifically told by Wizards. Here is what I know: *company by company, not product by product *support 4E OR support 3E, but not both...

SS, if you think they arent watching and reading THIS thread as much as we are, think again.

I'm not sure where you got that. There never was and never has been a plan to do a 3E version of the APG. Why would we need 3E versions of druids, bards, monks, barbarians and illusionists and gnomes and half-orcs? The game already has them Our plan for 3E pdf supplements was for books that...

I didnt "mention" it. I related it to all of you as it was told to me. I hope they come in and confirm it. I dont like being in the position of sharing my conversations with them and not having an official word. But, mark my words, this is the policy. And it isnt changing. I tried.

I was told that specifically by Wizards of the Coast. In direct response to that direct question. The answer was, "we dont want fence sitters. Companies have to choose."

You are right. I, too, want this clarified. Perhaps I misunderstood Wizards when my question was answered earlier today. Or maybe they misunderstood my question.

OK, I havent gone to bed yet. I have to step up and defend my girl Lidda. I dont think that trolls post was meant the way it came across. Clark

I'm going to bed. I can't take it anymore. I hate (yes, that is a strong word) that this issue is overshadowing the fact that 4E will be open. I am so bummed. I'm not saying it shouldnt overshadow it. It is a legitimate thing to discuss. I was just hoping to bask in the accomplishment of 4E...

Yeah, I've been thinking about that too. Its one thing to say "take off the d20 logo" its another thing to say "no more selling OGL products." That one is up in the air. It will depend on how that restriction reads.

We dont know yet. But based on Scott's comment that [paraphrasing] the same kinds of products could be made as were possible under the STL, I am guessing that means that if those things didnt work with a d20 logo, they wont work with the GSL.