4E and the OGL

[Delta]

The sense of entitlement I see from OGL fans and the religious fervor over it rubs me the wrong way, and I'm not a WotC worshipper.

Question -- Would a position such as this also rub you the wrong way?

Q: Is there an ethical reason to support Open Gaming?

A: In this writer's opinion, yes there is. It has been an established feature of RPGs since their inception that they should be used to create new content. Prior to the advent of widespread Open Game licenses, there was no practical way for that kind of material to be legally and widely distributed.

Open Gaming is recognition that your natural human right to free speech is protected and enhanced. The Open Game system is a way for the game publishing industry to finally deliver on the basic promises made by the very first RPGs; that individuals should be free to copy, modify and distribute their own creative works derived from the game systems they have acquired.​

​

 

[Cadfan]

Yes. It rubs me the wrong way. I don't see it as a free speech issue at all, and conflating it with free speech bugs me. It bugs me for two reasons- first, because it makes this into some big moral issue and it really isn't, and second, because it obscures the fact that the OGL is primarily a matter of relations between businesses, not between WOTC and its customers. The OGL does affect consumers, and does affect the ability of consumers to home brew and publish their home bew material online for free, but that can be handled without an OGL. I don't like attempts to conflate the two issues of customer home brew and for-profit publication.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Yes. It rubs me the wrong way. I don't see it as a free speech issue at all, and conflating it with free speech bugs me. It bugs me for two reasons- first, because it makes this into some big moral issue and it really isn't, and second, because it obscures the fact that the OGL is primarily a matter of relations between businesses, not between WOTC and its customers. The OGL does affect consumers, and does affect the ability of consumers to home brew and publish their home bew material online for free, but that can be handled without an OGL. I don't like attempts to conflate the two issues of customer home brew and for-profit publication.

This

 

[Delta]

bugs me for two reasons- first, because it makes this into some big moral issue and it really isn't, and second, because it obscures the fact that the OGL is primarily a matter of relations between businesses, not between WOTC and its customers.

And yet, that's actually the reason for the OGL, as WOTC itself saw it, when it was introduced, by the author of the OGL. The quote is from the OGL FAQ on the official WOTC website:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123d

So it's not really the "sense of entitlement I see from OGL fans" that's rubbing you guys the wrong way, nor is it a conflation or confusion of matters around the OGL. It's actually the declared goal of the OGL itself that is an irritation to you.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

And yet, that's actually the reason for the OGL, as WOTC itself saw it, when it was introduced, by the author of the OGL. The quote is from the OGL FAQ on the official WOTC website:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123d

So it's not really the "sense of entitlement I see from OGL fans" that's rubbing you guys the wrong way, nor is it a conflation or confusion of matters around the OGL. It's actually the declared goal of the OGL itself that is an irritation to you.

Again, you're trying to make a moral issue out of this when it isn't one. As Cadfan said, I don't think fans putting what they've done with the game on the internet and sharing it requires an OGL. It might have been back in the days of "They Sue Regularly", but these are not those days.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

Again, you're trying to make a moral issue out of this when it isn't one. As Cadfan said, I don't think fans putting what they've done with the game on the internet and sharing it requires an OGL. It might have been back in the days of "They Sue Regularly", but these are not those days.

When WotC releases it Fan Site Policy we shall see. Until then OGL is far safer than the unknown of the yet to be released policy.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

When WotC releases it Fan Site Policy we shall see. Until then OGL is far safer than the unknown of the yet to be released policy.

Has WotC taken action against any fansites so far during 4E? Ema's Character sheets has a 4E character manager program, and even charges for it. There is a link to Ema's Character Sheets on the WotC message boards.

 

[Delta]

Again, you're trying to make a moral issue out of this when it isn't one.

It's not me. It's the OGL itself (and its author/ owner).

 

[Admiral Caine]

I believe they were genuinely trying to improve the game, and in the process made it significantly different. Arguably to the point its not the same game, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing if you're trying to sell more product.

Please note, there's no judgment implied in my words, only pragmatism. That is, I don't think they made it different just to sell more books, but that is a side effect. I believe they were trying to make a good game. I think they succeeded. And as a Paizo superscriber, I give myself the benefit of the doubt as being unbiased.

NOW.. did they take the opportunity to get away from such an open license once they redesigned the game from the ground up? You betchya.

Nevertheless, I don't think the intent or motivation was to restrict the license, you see. That was merely an "after the fact" opportunity.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

It's not me. It's the OGL itself (and its author/ owner).

What you call taking a moral stance, I call advertising.