4E GSL - non core references

[Jraynack]

I don't want to have to keep track of 4,435 names for a Cloak of Protection, just because WOTC is circling the wagons on IP.

That is what I am afraid will happen to 3PP, unless they produce original and innovative ideas instead of the OGL rehashing that happened with 3.X.

I am glad the GSL is restrictive (to a point), because it does force 3PP to be creative.

 

[Ranger REG]

That is what I am afraid will happen to 3PP, unless they produce original and innovative ideas instead of the OGL rehashing that happened with 3.X.

I am glad the GSL is restrictive (to a point), because it does force 3PP to be creative.

What if I don't agree with WotC's version of the Cloak of Protection?

--still a fan of OGL.

 

[Jraynack]

What if I don't agree with WotC's version of the Cloak of Protection?

--still a fan of OGL.

Well, that is a Game Master's choice to switch things around - realistically, as a publisher, it is (most of the time) more profitable to side with the majority since the majority of people play D&D as it is written in the core books (I am talking about making supplements).

To be frank, I am a great fan of the OGL, but my problem is consumers get screwed by buying regurgitated rules (I do not refer to innovations and "add-ons" to existing rules). It is definitely a "buyer beware" market - and now even more so because you will see Shaw of Protection, Robe of Protection, T-shirt of Protection, etc. with a little rewording to make it slightly different rather than making new and imaginative items.

What consumer spending his or her hard-earned money would like that? I know I wouldn't.

As a Game Master myself, if I don't like something I change it or leave it out all together (both are rare in my game). I really don't need to buy a 3PP book telling me that WotC has it all wrong about what a Cloak of Protection should be. I want something to enhance my game or my role-playing experience - or fill a need that WotC has yet to provide.

I do have plenty of OGL stuff still for sale, but hurry I will have to take most of it down before Oct. 1st due to the launch of our new GSL products .

- - wishing people bought more OGL stuff, but WotC is playing with a stacked deck and people hunger for new and shiny GSL products.

I must say though, I do enjoy designing 4th Edition material over 3rd Edition. Plus, I always hated the legal mumbo jumbo of the OGL along with painstakingly identifying my PI and OGC. WotC just needs to loosen the reins a bit on the SRD for 4th Edition and I will be in hog heaven.

 

[Morrus]

but seriously, you're free to steal ideas. no one can own an idea...only can own the expression of an idea. ...at least in US law.

.... unless you've signed a contract agreeing that yo won't in exchange for use of a brandname and logo. Like the GSL, for example.

 

[Ranger REG]

To be frank, I am a great fan of the OGL, but my problem is consumers get screwed by buying regurgitated rules (I do not refer to innovations and "add-ons" to existing rules). It is definitely a "buyer beware" market - and now even more so because you will see Shaw of Protection, Robe of Protection, T-shirt of Protection, etc. with a little rewording to make it slightly different rather than making new and imaginative items.

What consumer spending his or her hard-earned money would like that? I know I wouldn't.

A customer that knows what he wants and doesn't accept only one option for his favorite rulesystem. Using an analogy, I'd rather see many varieties (brands) of peanut butter on the shelves, even though they're based on a basic peanut butter recipe. I don't want to see only one choice.

 

[Jraynack]

A customer that knows what he wants and doesn't accept only one option for his favorite rulesystem. Using an analogy, I'd rather see many varieties (brands) of peanut butter on the shelves, even though they're based on a basic peanut butter recipe. I don't want to see only one choice.

True enough, but do you expect the customer to buy everyone of those brands of peanut butter or just one. I like variety as a customer, but in the end it is just another brand of peanut butter (personally, I like it whipped ).

But, as a publisher, I am going to cater to the rule system that sells the most and not devote my time to off-shoots. Furthermore, I will do it by not rehashing their elements and selling it as new, but adding components to it hopefully improving the game.

So, using your analogy, I cater to those that eat peanut butter (the most popular brand; i.e. those in the majority) and not cashew butter, or "hey, it tastes just like peanut butter", or the supermarket brand that uses the same recipe.

It's not good business sense.

On the flip side, as a customer, I like delving into new systems: Deadlands, Vampire, etc. or seeing how others tweaked the 3.X rules system to make a new game (True 20, Iron Heroes) - I might borrow from those systems - but in the end I am still playing good ole' D&D on Friday nights (and so does a majority of gamers).

So, why, as a publisher, should I devote my time rehashing what is already done for just one or two customers to have variety when I can make something entirely new to fit in the system they already love and enjoy.

Fun for a customer, but not great business sense as a publisher.

 

[Ranger REG]

True enough, but do you expect the customer to buy everyone of those brands of peanut butter or just one. I like variety as a customer, but in the end it is just another brand of peanut butter (personally, I like it whipped ).

What if WotC provided is NOT whipped?

You may like it whipped, but I like mine crunchy. As I said before, it's good to have options. Not everyone here is an Eberron fan. Not everyone is a fan of the 3.5e Complete Warrior Samurai class.

 

[Jraynack]

What if WotC provided is NOT whipped?

You may like it whipped, but I like mine crunchy. As I said before, it's good to have options. Not everyone here is an Eberron fan. Not everyone is a fan of the 3.5e Complete Warrior Samurai class.

Yes, but you still didn't answer my question:

So, why, as a publisher, should I devote my time rehashing what is already done for just one or two customers to have variety when I can make something entirely new to fit in the system they already love and enjoy?

 

[Ranger REG]

So, why, as a publisher, should I devote my time...

Because you can do better than WotC (i.e., out-of-the-box thinking), especially when you're aware of their customers' dissatisfaction with certain mechanics. Not all of them, since you are using WotC's stuff to make money.

As a publisher, how are you going to make me spend my money on your products? Or are you just another "peanut butter brand"?

 

[pemerton]

As a publisher, how are you going to make me spend my money on your products? Or are you just another "peanut butter brand"?

I think the idea is to add new content to D&D so that the majority (who buy WoTC's D&D books and like to play that game) will want to buy the book, rather than to publish reworkings of what is already present in D&D, which is appealing only to those (hypothesised to be a minority) who don't like what WoTC is selling them in the D&D books.