Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A nice followup to Chris Dias' letter to WotC
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Vigilance" data-source="post: 5509716" data-attributes="member: 4275"><p>I agree, I don't think it was PR.</p><p></p><p>Remember, one of the "selling points" internally at WOTC for the OGL back in the development of 3rd edition was "hey, these guys will write adventures, those are least profitable products!"</p><p></p><p>Of course, 3PPs could figure that out just as easily as WOTC, and so, while there were adventures made, there was also a lot of those OTHER books, the much more profitable player-focused "splats".</p><p></p><p>So I feel, with the GSL, WOTC tried to *really* have their cake and eat it too, and write a license that de facto limited 3PPs to those least profitable of products, adventures.</p><p></p><p>Except they seem not to have anticipated that there was a THIRD option other than "make anything we want" and "make adventures to support 4e":</p><p></p><p>Make Nothing for 4e. </p><p></p><p>Given that the OGL was still there, companies like Green Ronin and Paizo and RPGObjects could just keep on keeping on supporting the games they always had. </p><p></p><p>While the OGL certainly had some unintended consequences WOTC didn't like, it was on the whole a HUGE benefit to them for exactly the reasons Dancey initially proposed. </p><p></p><p>The player network moved to d20 in DROVES. It became the common tongue of RPGs. If you had a niche "long tail" rpg idea, you were much more likely to use d20, since you understood it, and the majority of players understood it.</p><p></p><p>If your idea was crazy to begin with, you can make it more appealing by at least letting people know the underlying system is solid, and that they won;t have to break their brains too much learning it. </p><p></p><p>This meant everyone was dealing with WOTC's rules all the time, and much more likely to find something of merit there to make them check out the "official stuff".</p><p></p><p>WOTC gave all that up for the chance at a few more adventures, and it failed spectacularly.</p><p></p><p>I'd also argue that a lot of the mechanical changes in 4e, which were very unpopular, were specifically designed to prevent a 3PP from "OSRIC-ing" 4e and reverse engineering it under the OGL.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Vigilance, post: 5509716, member: 4275"] I agree, I don't think it was PR. Remember, one of the "selling points" internally at WOTC for the OGL back in the development of 3rd edition was "hey, these guys will write adventures, those are least profitable products!" Of course, 3PPs could figure that out just as easily as WOTC, and so, while there were adventures made, there was also a lot of those OTHER books, the much more profitable player-focused "splats". So I feel, with the GSL, WOTC tried to *really* have their cake and eat it too, and write a license that de facto limited 3PPs to those least profitable of products, adventures. Except they seem not to have anticipated that there was a THIRD option other than "make anything we want" and "make adventures to support 4e": Make Nothing for 4e. Given that the OGL was still there, companies like Green Ronin and Paizo and RPGObjects could just keep on keeping on supporting the games they always had. While the OGL certainly had some unintended consequences WOTC didn't like, it was on the whole a HUGE benefit to them for exactly the reasons Dancey initially proposed. The player network moved to d20 in DROVES. It became the common tongue of RPGs. If you had a niche "long tail" rpg idea, you were much more likely to use d20, since you understood it, and the majority of players understood it. If your idea was crazy to begin with, you can make it more appealing by at least letting people know the underlying system is solid, and that they won;t have to break their brains too much learning it. This meant everyone was dealing with WOTC's rules all the time, and much more likely to find something of merit there to make them check out the "official stuff". WOTC gave all that up for the chance at a few more adventures, and it failed spectacularly. I'd also argue that a lot of the mechanical changes in 4e, which were very unpopular, were specifically designed to prevent a 3PP from "OSRIC-ing" 4e and reverse engineering it under the OGL. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
A nice followup to Chris Dias' letter to WotC
Top