4e D&D GSL Live

[Orcus]

There's a simple reason for this -- because if they did use open content then they would have to release under the hated OGL.

They actually did use OGC in MM2--my OGC in fact. In a hillarious twist of fate, they totally screwed up their section 15 designation and were in violation of their own license

 

[Orcus]

But what about the NEXT Rappan Athuk? If you've got a great idea for a D&D setting/locale, isn't putting it through the GSL just as risky as putting your already-great idea into it? In other words, the only thing you can safely publish under the GSL is substandard dribble you wouldn't mind never using again.

I dont agree with that.

But what you have to think about as a publisher is--once the GSL is gone, if I did this as a 4E product I may never be able to produce it as a game book again. Unless something other than the OGL becomes viable. But then again it is hard for me to believe that in 8 or so years when 5E hits that there will still be a lively OGL crowd. I dont know. All this requires a crystal ball, and as you all know there are no crystal balls in 4E

 

[Orcus]

But what about the NEXT Rappan Athuk? If you've got a great idea for a D&D setting/locale, isn't putting it through the GSL just as risky as putting your already-great idea into it? In other words, the only thing you can safely publish under the GSL is substandard dribble you wouldn't mind never using again.

Though I dont agree with your last sentence, I do agree with the concern that you began the post with--what about the next RA? I believe we are full of great ideas and the next thing may well be as good or better than what we have done before. So sure I protect RA by not making it 4E, but what about my next great idea, as we say?

 

[Orcus]

Bottom line: the guy laughing all the way to the bank is Joe Goodman.

Individual, stand alone, non-setting specific adventures without a ton of individually valuable IP (such as a setting book would have) are CLEARLY the best type of product under the GSL.

 

[Ydars]

Except that NOW everyone will produce and support OGL compliant games and not 4E!

Well done Joe; you may just have sunk D&D!

 

[Mouseferatu]

Bottom line: the guy laughing all the way to the bank is Joe Goodman.

Individual, stand alone, non-setting specific adventures without a ton of individually valuable IP (such as a setting book would have) are CLEARLY the best type of product under the GSL.

Funky the way these things turn out, huh, Clark? Back in the day, that's basically where Necromancer was. Now you guys have some of the most recognizable 3rd-party IP out there. Who'd have thought that would ever have a downside?

 

[Samuel Leming]

I dont agree with that.

But what you have to think about as a publisher is--once the GSL is gone, if I did this as a 4E product I may never be able to produce it as a game book again. Unless something other than the OGL becomes viable. But then again it is hard for me to believe that in 8 or so years when 5E hits that there will still be a lively OGL crowd. I dont know. All this requires a crystal ball, and as you all know there are no crystal balls in 4E

None of us have crystal balls, but it's safe to say that you can find brass balls at both WotC and Paizo...

Sam

 

[alanpossible]

Well, I'm thinking about asking my "illiterate cousin Jimmy" if he wants to dictate a new RPG. His mom has been reading him RPGs and he's got some ideas for one. Would it be ok to use your class and race names?

Certainly

 

[see]

Individual, stand alone, non-setting specific adventures without a ton of individually valuable IP (such as a setting book would have) are CLEARLY the best type of product under the GSL.

Oddly, though, the only case where using the GSL makes sense is when you want to provide a full statblock — in which case, you have to invent new powers, since you're not allowed to duplicate 4e power descriptions.

If you're just doing reference-a-standard-monster adventure, as the 4e GSL/SRD seems to encourage, you don't need the 4e GSL/SRD. The OGL and 3.5 SRD works well enough. After all, most of the monsters are in the 3.5 SRD. Heck, you can't use a "Devil (Pit Fiend)" under the GSL at all . . . but in an OGL-licensed adventure, what's going to stop you?

 

[Gotham Gamemaster]

Bottom line: the guy laughing all the way to the bank is Joe Goodman.

Individual, stand alone, non-setting specific adventures without a ton of individually valuable IP (such as a setting book would have) are CLEARLY the best type of product under the GSL.

With the debut of the Known Realms, that doesn't seem to be the case anymore though. DCCs, while still eminently usable in any setting, have setting-specific info and Punjar, the Tarnished Jewel (their first 4e product) is certainly set in Aereth. Has there been any word from Goodman Games on the GSL?