Another Cease and Desist Letter: 4E Powercards
- Thread starter Admiral Caine
- Start date
CharlesRyan
Adventurer
I love how, whenever anything comes out of WotC that people like, specific individuals are cited. But if it's something people disagree with, the corporate boogeyman is the cause.
Ryan Dancey set up the OGL and d20L not as some maverick loose cannon, but as a manager working at a large corporation. Later, other individuals (myself included) worked on the OGL's future incarnations at the same large corporation.
No boogeyman. Just people.
Scribble
First Post
Great. Thanks a lot. Now I can't get an image of Ryan Dancy (with a Mullet) being screamed at by a cigar smoking, way too stressed, on the verge of a heart attack, Peter Adkison over a paper strewn desk 80s action movie style out of my head.
"You're a loose cannon Dancy! A LOOSE CANNON! I got gamers screamin down my neck for this new drug cartel expansion pack, and you bring me THIS?!?! Now you get out there and design me that expansiopn pack and I don't wanna hear another word about this cocamamy OGL scheme! OR NEXT TIME I"LL HAVE YOUR PEN!!! YOU HEAR ME?!?!"
Krensky
First Post
Damn you sir for putting that scene in my head.
jmucchiello
Hero
You ask that as if the OGL could not both be to the benefit of D&D players and the D&D brand owner.
In fact, asking that implies you believe he was capable of harming the commercial value of the D&D brand while working for the publicly traded company owning that brand. That's a harsh accusation to make against a business executive.
There are many different lines in this and to try to analyze we will be reopening a can of warms.
Lets say I asked what I asked as to try to contrast the other poster's point. Perhaps it was not diplomatic in the way you put it here but I think you have read too much into it.
Having said that business executives are capable for various things and this is apparent especially today. And it is not that I feel any shame against them believing this. But I am certainly not referring here to the matter in question.
SteveC
Doing the best imitation of myself
Charles...I think what you see with this is that when there are positive developments to announce, people take credit for them in a public manner. Ryan was very proud of the development of the OGL, and let the world know about it. In the case discussed in this thread, no one has (or likely will for a whole host of reasons) come forward and say "this was my decision, I'm taking responsibility for it."
It is not a particularly good secret that the OGL fell out of favor during the Hasbro years, and the result of that is it wasn't carried over into the new edition. Once again, we don't have a person to step up and say "I'm responsible for the GSL instead of continuing the OGL for the new Edition: it was my decision." My assumption is that is because the decision was not made by anyone who ever reads ENWorld, nor, frankly, even plays RPGs. Now I said assumption, so that's assuming, with all that it implies. If someone would like to step forward and claim credit for the change, I'd be happy to credit them directly, but I don't expect that will happen.
I'm not trying to be snarky here, and I do understand what you mean, but I think it's just a victim of the corporate culture.
--Steve
Brown Jenkin
First Post
Well said SteveC
Fifth Element
Legend
I thought my use of "might" and "may" made it clear that I don't know where the "line" is, if indeed there is one. I was simply responding to the positive assertion that the avatar defnitely violates copyright.
CharlesRyan
Adventurer
Steve, thanks for the cogent, rational response. That said, I disagree. Scott Rouse has discussed the GSL many times, and made it very clear that he's the one responsible for it, at least at the implementation level. Given no preconceptions, it seems that the default assumption should be that Scott is responsible. I posit that since many people are suspicious of the GSL, they fall back on preconceptions that it was mandated to Scott by some mythical cadre of "suits."
[A side note: For all I know, maybe it was--I have no inside information on this issue. But that wasn't my experience of how things happened back in my days at WotC.]
You kind of show your own preconceptions here:
I was the custodian of the OGL over the middle of 3rd edition's lifecycle, and I contest this statement. Certainly, opinions varied among individuals within the organization, as they will among individuals everywhere (especially gamers!). And, after five or six years' experience with it, the benefit of hindsight gave us many ideas about how we might have implemented it differently. But "fell out of favour" is far too categorical to be accurate, at least up through my tenure.
[A side note: For all I know, maybe it was--I have no inside information on this issue. But that wasn't my experience of how things happened back in my days at WotC.]
You kind of show your own preconceptions here:
I was the custodian of the OGL over the middle of 3rd edition's lifecycle, and I contest this statement. Certainly, opinions varied among individuals within the organization, as they will among individuals everywhere (especially gamers!). And, after five or six years' experience with it, the benefit of hindsight gave us many ideas about how we might have implemented it differently. But "fell out of favour" is far too categorical to be accurate, at least up through my tenure.
Similar Threads
