A new site Idea The OGC exchange

[NemesisPress]

You shouldn't worry about "piracy." Publishers decide for themselves what will be OGC. Relying on difficulty of distribution to make their product valuable is a short-sighted strategy.

This is a good idea, but you will have to go it alone at first. However, once you hit critical mass (much as Enworld has), people will be knocking on your door.

In fact, I'd suggest you partner with EnWorld. It would be synergistic.

 

[kingpaul]

If you'll recall, the conclusion of that mess was heralded by some of the 'pros' forming their own, private list.

Is that where that came from? I remember that exclusive list being formed, but couldn't recall what precipitated it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Rich, I'm going to start by agreeing with you, it was about exclusivity.

But I am also going to present the other side of the coin. As I see it, the industry types felt that the idea had merit, but leaving it in the hands of RR wasn't a good idea-- especially after his outburst. Given the nature of the d20/PDF issue, where literally anyone with a keyboard can be a publisher, and in order to have better control of the signal-to-noise ratio of such a list, it seemed better to take the list private, as opposed to public. A public list where the RR's of the world were free to rant and rave and, intentionally or not, troll the d20 community, didn't seem particualrly useful.

That said, I certainly wish I had access to that list... Alas, I don't qualify either.


Wulf

 

[smetzger]

1) I think it is a good idea and I will help in whatever way I can.
2) I do not think that it will hurt sales of print products. I think it will be like free advertising for the products in question. This is an opinion and there is no way to prove either way that it will help, hurt, or not effect sales.
3) I do not think that it is morally wrong. Anyone who has produced OGC has already agreed to letting the material be released by other publishers without any monetary compensation to the copyright holder.
4) I think that this will eventually be done by someone. The Netbook of feats has already started down this road by including all the OGLed WOTC feats. They also told me in an email that they are planning on including other 3rd party OGC feats.
5) I think that somewhere near the beginning of a feat, skill, spell, class, or whatever you should list the copyright holder and the product in which it appeared. This would be in addition to section 15.

*:> Scott

 

[Vrylakos]

I think the crosspollination is useful in only certain circumstances, where it creates universal rules that other companies might take advantage of and that creates a common rules-set or language.

Posting every Prestige Class from a product does not aid in this, IMO.

Posting, say, a set of rules for underwater combat, or posting a rules system for jousting does.

Posting some new monster abilities would aid this creation of a common ground.

Posting ALL of the stats from the upcoming Big Book O' Monsters would not, and would amount to piracy.

What I'd like to see is people adopting the work of others... say, one system for mass combat, and either updating it or patching it to make it better either overall or for their specific purposes. (Mass combat in Dark Sun might use a slightly patched version of a theoretical OGC Mass Combat system.)

What I'm bugged by is the duplication of rules and sorting out which ones are better. One month it was all ships and maritime books being published, another it was all mass combat being talked about, now it's races, it seems, etc. etc. In the midst of all this overlap, there are differing versions of the same concepts expressed in rules... Some are good, others... not so.

Monte CooK and Mike Mearls stand out as good rules engineers, and I now buy their stuff because of this. It would be a benefit if Company X could use Monte Cook's "d20 Cooking Rules" and credit Monte with it. People would see the work of good rules engineers and it might allow for greater exposure. This crosspollination would be a good thing.

For critical rules chunks there could be a common ground, a common language, and an OGC site devoted to this moral/business stance might be a good thing.

VRYLAKOS

 

[The Sigil]

Hey, I'm going to stick my neck out here, but what do I know?

Personally, given that WotC didn't have to give us ANYTHING to play with -- and yet they did, in the form of the SRD, it's ludicrous for publishers to demand exclusivity. You're playing with the toys someone else shared with you freely - it's not too much for them to ask you to share stuff too.

IOW, I think it's more "morally wrong" to try to "hang on to your OGC to wring every last penny out of it" than it is to republish somebody else's OGC without their permission... I respect the industry's right to make a living, but let's be honest... a year or two after publication, you're really not making money on your product any more - make it free (as in free beer).

Heck, I'll even put my money where my mouth is... even if I *AM* "just" a PDF publisher.

I submitted the Enchiridion of Mystic Music for consideration in the Ennies. I have no idea if I will be nominated or not, but hey, at least I'm trying, right? But I'll tell you right here and right now what my plans for the EoMM are...

(Bear in mind that the EoMM is 99.9% OGC - the only non-OGC parts are the OGL itself and my own name, imprint name, e-mail address, and product names.)

I intend to eventually make all of the OGC in the EoMM available for free for anyone who wants them. How do I define "eventually?" "Eventually" happens when any one of the following comes to pass:

1.) I make sufficient profit on the EoMM for me to declare it a success. Right now, I am sitting right at about half of the amount of profit that, in my mind, would make the book a "success."

2.) Sufficient time passes from the release of the work that I can't reasonably expect to make much more money off of it. In my mind, that would be 2 months without a sale or 12 months from the date of release.

I am holding off on firm judgment until the product has been out 6 months (2 months from now), but rest assured, you WILL see me release it freely eventually.

I have faith in the RPG community - I figure those who really want stuff and care about the community and its continued financial viability will be happy to pay for some (not all) products when they first appear - even if they know that if they wait for a year or so, they can get it for free... especially if they know that NOT paying for stuff will eventually drive publishers out of business.

Maybe that puts me in the minority, I don't know. I would of course encourage you to buy one now - it's in my best interests financially. Go to RPGNow.com right now and get one.

But I also feel morally obligated to release OGC for truly free (as in free beer) "public consumption" if it won't register as a significant financial impact for me... or if I've made as much money as I feel my work is "worth." I'm not here to get rich, I'm here to enrich the community.

Do I hope my stuff is nominated for an Ennie? Of course - I think it will drive some more sales... and hit my "ceiling" faster (the ceiling of profit I am willing to make before releasing the book for free). If it isn't, hey, that's okay, too - there's a lot of good competition out there. I happen to think it's the best darn bard book out there (yes, better than BoEM2 - and that's no knock on Monte, who does excellent stuff - but if I didn't think the EoMM was better, I wouldn't have released it in the first place).

Anyway, enough of my babbling. I have said how I feel, and I'm willing to put my money - or at least my product - where my mouth is. And that's all I have to say abou that.

--The Sigil

 

[Ace]

Hey, I'm going to stick my neck out here, but what do I know?

Personally, given that WotC didn't have to give us ANYTHING to play with -- and yet they did, in the form of the SRD, it's ludicrous for publishers to demand exclusivity. You're playing with the toys someone else shared with you freely - it's not too much for them to ask you to share stuff too.

IOW, I think it's more "morally wrong" to try to "hang on to your OGC to wring every last penny out of it" than it is to republish somebody else's OGC without their permission... I respect the industry's right to make a living, but let's be honest... a year or two after publication, you're really not making money on your product any more - make it free (as in free beer).

Heck, I'll even put my money where my mouth is... even if I *AM* "just" a PDF publisher.

I submitted the Enchiridion of Mystic Music for consideration in the Ennies. I have no idea if I will be nominated or not, but hey, at least I'm trying, right? But I'll tell you right here and right now what my plans for the EoMM are...

(Bear in mind that the EoMM is 99.9% OGC - the only non-OGC parts are the OGL itself and my own name, imprint name, e-mail address, and product names.)

I intend to eventually make all of the OGC in the EoMM available for free for anyone who wants them. How do I define "eventually?" "Eventually" happens when any one of the following comes to pass:

1.) I make sufficient profit on the EoMM for me to declare it a success. Right now, I am sitting right at about half of the amount of profit that, in my mind, would make the book a "success."

2.) Sufficient time passes from the release of the work that I can't reasonably expect to make much more money off of it. In my mind, that would be 2 months without a sale or 12 months from the date of release.

I am holding off on firm judgment until the product has been out 6 months (2 months from now), but rest assured, you WILL see me release it freely eventually.

I have faith in the RPG community - I figure those who really want stuff and care about the community and its continued financial viability will be happy to pay for some (not all) products when they first appear - even if they know that if they wait for a year or so, they can get it for free... especially if they know that NOT paying for stuff will eventually drive publishers out of business.

Maybe that puts me in the minority, I don't know. I would of course encourage you to buy one now - it's in my best interests financially. Go to RPGNow.com right now and get one.

But I also feel morally obligated to release OGC for truly free (as in free beer) "public consumption" if it won't register as a significant financial impact for me... or if I've made as much money as I feel my work is "worth." I'm not here to get rich, I'm here to enrich the community.

Do I hope my stuff is nominated for an Ennie? Of course - I think it will drive some more sales... and hit my "ceiling" faster (the ceiling of profit I am willing to make before releasing the book for free). If it isn't, hey, that's okay, too - there's a lot of good competition out there. I happen to think it's the best darn bard book out there (yes, better than BoEM2 - and that's no knock on Monte, who does excellent stuff - but if I didn't think the EoMM was better, I wouldn't have released it in the first place).

Anyway, enough of my babbling. I have said how I feel, and I'm willing to put my money - or at least my product - where my mouth is. And that's all I have to say abou that.

--The Sigil

Well if the other publishers feel as you do, that after they have exhausted the earning potential of the work that they are willing to put it out for others to use than the exchange is doable.

If most publishers aren't interested or whover does it (if not me) isn't honorable than it will flop.

My main concerns are getting the stuff out there, protecting compnay earnings (this is very important to me) and lastly gaining some benefit from it.

The curious fact is I am not in any D&D games at this time and I don't expect to be any time soon.

I don't need the stuff and I am probably not going to be doing any writing for 3e ,unless I win the contest of course .

I wouldn't mind a 'give back' to the gaming community but if I have to do half as much work as poor Morrus or Eric Noah did, well lets put it this way.

I can't.

I have a gig of files or so, mostly OGC stuff from the net I would be happy to share with someone if they are interested but when I look at it and consider the likely trouble it would cause I hesitate.

The time/ money equation is pretty bad afaik. If someone knows better let me know

As it look right now I have the cost of web hosting plus at least ten hours a week to put into it.

Plus there will be a ton of start time and the likely hood of a general negative response from the big boys

Still I love the attitude that Sigil and Wulf Ratbane have. I just worry that from what people tell em they won't widely be shared.

As I mentioned this is just a trial balloon, I was wondering what the interest level would be.

Any tips from the guys with the big sites as to time and money costs would be appreciated, I still do't have enough info to go on.
Yet

 

[mattcolville]

My opinion of this is fairly simple. If you start posting OGC on the web en masse, then publishers will stop designating stuff as open. They'll stick to the minimum 5% required.

Chatdemon, I'm not sure that I agree with your assessment of the purpose of the OGL. What you are describing is the spirit of Open Source material; just because the OGL has the world "Open" in the name doesn't make it the same thing.

In my opinion (which is, admittedly, no more vaid than yours, but I'm pretty sure of myself here), the license is designed to 1) allow publishers to base derivative materials on the core rules and 2) to cross-pollinate to an extent. "2" is more of a by-product though; the aim of it is to sell core rulebooks.

As Ace says - you could take Librum Equitus and sell it yourself; or post the content for free. It's pretty much all OGC. Legallyyou're OK. In my opinion, morally you're not. And if you do that, wait and see how much OGC appears in that publisher's next book.

No publisher should ever release content as OGC if they're uncomfortable with seeing it legally in print or on the web.

I said, in or OGL list over a year ago that some collected database of OGC was inevitable, stuff like Interlink and other private mailing lists were inevitable. It's all going to happen sooner or later.

 

[Grazzt]

I said, in or OGL list over a year ago that some collected database of OGC was inevitable, stuff like Interlink and other private mailing lists were inevitable. It's all going to happen sooner or later.

True- most likely. Surprised it has happened already. But, if someone does collect all the OGC stuff and post without the publisher's permission, they are (or rather could be) in a bit of trouble. Just because something is listed as "Open" doesn't make it Public Domain. Still gotta get Company X's permission even for open content.

 

[Grazzt]

I read those threads, and in my opinion, the hostile reception had far more to do with Robert's arrogant attitude at the time. In fact RR himself suggested almost immediately afterwards that he'd only entered the list in the first place to somehow "flush out" the "industry types" and show everyone "what they were really all about."

It was like reading the ravings of a madman.


Wulf

I read those threads too and I am in agreement with Wulf on this one. It was RR's attitude that turned it sour.