Search results

There was also a crying need for 3E--or atleast for some update to the game. 2E from 1E wasnt much in the way of an upgrade. The rules, since AD&D, hadnt really changed. And TSR had fallen off the map, essentially. They werent creating much of value. D&D NEEDED that new edition to energize it...

I agree with this post in general. My guess is that the customer loss for not doing 4E under the OGL would not be huge (it would be some, but not that huge. 5-7% seems about right to me as a gut number). BUT I think the loss would be more significant if not open at all. I have long said I...

Linae, Nice to see you drop in! :) I know you are in a tough spot. You cant officially comment but you want to make sure we know Wizards is listening and is taking what we have to say seriously. I, for one, appreciate that. Thanks. Clark

I hear what you are saying. But consider this: if they were going to have killed open gaming, they could have done it already. All this hair pulling and tooth gnashing that seems to be going on over there suggests to me that the struggle is over HOW to do it, not over WHETHER OR NOT to do it at...

One could simply say, hey Wizards look at this: Of 511 possible sales: If it is not open at all: Buying 4E: 307 Not buying for lack of openness: 121 Not going 4E at all: 59 Not sure: 24 With openness and presuming third party publishers can sway people like we did for 3E from the "not going"...

That is a crazy interpretation. I'd look at it this way: nearly 50% as many people wont buy it without openness as would buy it no matter what.

This is really interesting: Openness doesn’t matter: 307 Openness matters: 121 Not going 4E: 59 Not sure: 24 The margin for those who dont care about openness to those who do (to some degree) is almost only 2:1. That is pretty significant. Plus, reading posts by the people who say they are...

Yeah, that was great!

Hyrum- To some extent you are right. It is different people. But I have spoken with Scott and Linae about this stuff. I know they believe in open gaming. I know they see the value of it. I know they understand the value of the 3P publishers to migrating existing customers to 4E. I know they...

I'm not sure this reflects a lack of support for open gaming. I think what it shows is how annoying the SRD is and how hard it is to update with content from new products. They way they did it for 3E is not optimal from either Wizards' or our standpoint. We want to be able to reference all the...

Sorry I am blasting posts out so quick. I am just doing this over lunch. :)

I already thought of that :) Actually, the problem isnt the OGL. But if they chose "C" they could include in the PI agreement that it is usable with OGL version 1.0a or subsequent versions. Because I am a goober and I love these licenses I have actaully taken a stab at drafting them how I...

If you scroll up this page of the thread, you will see my four options as I see them. You asked what I would counsel Wizards to pick. Either B or C. In my thread I guessed they would do C, which is how I would structure the GSL if I was them.

I am not a psychic. They cut that power from Orcus when they went to 4E :) Just kidding. I am also not going to give legal advice :) But if I was Wizards, I would do one of two things: Either: 1. Just make a smarter SRD and use the current OGL; or 2. Make a smart SRD for 4E, designate it...

By the way, if you want evidence of what open gaming can do -- look around. This community is a community of open gaming. This site started as a 3E scoop site and quickly turned into a community for open gaming and third party publishers. Heck, ENWorld does awards for OGL/d20 products. It has a...

No problem! Presuming 4E is open to some extent, and the following products are allowed, I am plannining several cool things: 1. The Iron Tower Adventure Path 2. Tome of Horrors 4E 3. The Advanced Player's Guide (with some alternative classes and things, such as druids and bards, etc; not...

It appears that this issue is now being discussed in the Meta forum. I posted my thoughts there. I wont discuss it anymore here. Thanks for listening, even if you rule against me :) Clark

By the way, I've never been to Meta before this. :)

I agree with this method of deciding what goes where. As I have noted before, this is ENWorld. ENWorld got its start as a 3E scoop page. We all came here to get info on the soon to be released new 3rd edition. It also was the core message boards for the burgeoning third party publishers. Heck...

OK, wow. I missed this whole thing. Rel, to expand on your thoughts, I have the "go back to AD&D" thought every now and then. I mean, it is kind of part and parcel of my whole 1E feel thing. :) I have even run a few retro games, with old friends. I hate to admit it, but while it is super fun...