A nice followup to Chris Dias' letter to WotC

[Vigilance]

How is it 180 degrees? The GSL does exist, which allows for 3pps creating content for 4e. If WotC didn't want this, they didn't have to create the GSL at all. Your implied company policy statement is counter to the existence of the GSL.

It's 180 degrees because the GSL is far more restrictive than the OGL.

Also, the license was late by, what, a year?

In other words, WOTC moved from more open (OGL), to less open (GSL), and from more attentive to letting everyone know right off the bat that their new open license was the last thing on their agenda.

So yes, asking them to be more attentive would require them to turn 180 degrees and go back in the direction they are currently moving away from.

 

[Erudite Frog]

If you're not developing 4e content, why does it seem bother you so much?

 

[xechnao]

If you're not developing 4e content, why does it seem bother you so much?

Are you?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

If you're not developing 4e content, why does it seem bother you so much?

Maybe because if the GSL was less restrictive then he would be developing 4e products?

That one seems pretty obvious to me.... And I think that a lot of 3PP would welcome a more open GSL and a more responsive WotC by creating more products.

Certainly a friendly response from Paizo resulted in new products for Pathfinder, from the original poster of the letter. Perhaps a similar response from WotC would likewise result in more diverse products?

I don't like 4e, but I think that WotC becoming more responsive can only be a good thing.

The Auld Grump

 

[Jeffrey]

As long as we are discussing wild crazy and insane thoughts, maybe Hasbro has wanted D&D dead since it bought the brand with 3e out there instead of AD&D.

The fact of the matter is that on June 17th, 1989 at @8:35pm, in the basement of a friend, Brian Goldner had his 17th level Elven Ranger/Thief killed off by a sadistic DM.

He's been waiting for his chance ever since.

 

[Vigilance]

If you're not developing 4e content, why does it seem bother you so much?

Not sure if this was directed at me or not, but I'll take a run at it anyway.

At the time, when I was working for RPGObjects, we had published d20 books and d20 Modern books and were very keen on the idea of getting in "on the ground floor" of a new edition.

My partner Chris Davis and I had bought the 4e core books and were actively brainstorming ideas on how we would support it.

Then the GSL was delayed. And then it was delayed again. And then they just stopped giving dates on when it would be ready and said it would be done when it was done.

Then when the original license WAS released, its language essentially limited you to adventures only.

Then there was a long delay and it was somewhat revised.

By the time this process was over, any interest we had in developing anything for the rules was gone. Having spoken with other writers and publishers, I know we were not alone in that.

It seemed to me, that WOTC didn't *really* want full throated support for 4e from 3PP's. Sure, some extra adventures from us would be nice, but they didn't want any settings including variant rules, or any of the other types of books RPGObjects was known for and good at making.

So, we obliged them, by continuing to support d20 Modern and other OGL books and moving on.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I wonder how much of any communications problems that WotC may be having with 3PP come down to communications problems within WotC?

When two different, and incompatible, messages are bouncing around inside a company it can lead to some... interesting communications.

The Auld Grump

 

[gamerprinter]

It's 180 degrees because the GSL is far more restrictive than the OGL.

Also, the license was late by, what, a year?

In other words, WOTC moved from more open (OGL), to less open (GSL), and from more attentive to letting everyone know right off the bat that their new open license was the last thing on their agenda.

So yes, asking them to be more attentive would require them to turn 180 degrees and go back in the direction they are currently moving away from.

Oh I agree that the GSL is a crap license compared to the OGL, and not something I'd sign or have anything to do with as a 3pp. My point was the GSL still exists. 180 degrees would be if the GSL did not exist at all. Since it does, its more like 90 degrees or less. The fact that the GSL exists at all, suggests that there some acknowledgement to the 3pps, thus being now unsupportive to their 3pps, is something less than the total opposite.

The total opposite, would have been "Here's 4e and there is no 3pp license."

Truly if I wanted to make 4e material (which I don't) I wouldn't sign the GSL, I'd just make the content and put "designed for use with D&D 4e" on the cover - screw the GSL. That's what Goodman does - so its legal.

But that won't happen, because 4e doesn't inspire me to create for it.

 

[Vigilance]

Oh I agree that the GSL is a crap license compared to the OGL, and not something I'd sign or have anything to do with as a 3pp. My point was the GSL still exists. 180 degrees would be if the GSL did not exist at all. Since it does, its more like 90 degrees or less. The fact that the GSL exists at all, suggests that there some acknowledgement to the 3pps, thus being now unsupportive to their 3pps, is something less than the total opposite.

The total opposite, would have been "Here's 4e and there is no 3pp license."

Truly if I wanted to make 4e material (which I don't) I wouldn't sign the GSL, I'd just make the content and put "designed for use with D&D 4e" on the cover - screw the GSL. That's what Goodman does - so its legal.

But that won't happen, because 4e doesn't inspire me to create for it.

I think the existence of a license that says "write adventures to support our game but don't you DARE create anything new" vs. the license that allowed Spycraft and M&M is where I decide to call the GSL 180 degrees from the OGL.

 

[Fifth Element]

I think the existence of a license that says "write adventures to support our game but don't you DARE create anything new" vs. the license that allowed Spycraft and M&M is where I decide to call the GSL 180 degrees from the OGL.

But gameprinter has a point; if this is 180 degrees, then what would you call if if they had no license whatsoever?