D&D 4E d20 Modern 4e

[Ranger REG]

You'd either have to carefully screen the companies allowed to use the license, or screen individual products.

That would be hard considering that WotC would need for form up a review committee, and those who would be on it will have to work for free, assuming they want to do this before the product hit the market.

 

[Ranger REG]

What good would that do?

You want to keep it out of the grubby hands of the groundlings for awhile? Let it be pure and innocent for a time?

To encourage third-party publishers (big and small) to read and understand the nuance of the new rules before they make products based on them. That way we could lessen the flow of crappy products that may drown out the good ones in the market. I mean, who else besides me don't want to see another Foundation d20 superhero RPG?

That and, unlike the customer interest in 3e back in 1999-2000, 4e interest won't be as big.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

That would be hard considering that WotC would need for form up a review committee, and those who would be on it will have to work for free, assuming they want to do this before the product hit the market.

Well, we had OS to game system comparisons in another thread, so I point this out:
Microsoft allows only software to get the "Designed for Windows Vista" logo if the software achieves a catalogue of certain requirements. The tests are made by a third party (VeriSign), and to apply for it, you have to pay VeriSigns test fees (but nothing for microsoft), get their test results and send them to Microsoft. (I don't known what happens after that, because our software isn't there yet ).
The benefit for the Logo holder is that he is part of the Microsoft marketing campaign (being shown as a reference product and generally named along with the new OS, which obviously helps both sides). And the benefit for the customer is that he knows the software will _really_ work with the OS and has a certain minimum of quality guaranteed.

The problem for D&D is that there is no VeriSign equivalent yet, and also no framework on how to check for a D20 "worthy" product.

Maybe the D&D community can eventually establish something like VeriSign, and design guidelines or test cases could be developed with D&D 4th edition, but it certainly will take a lot of work.

 

[Kesh]

If you bothered to read the replies in WotC you would see that you need to pay a monthly fee to access the better stuff on the WotC site, but maybe I misread that Roudi!

Profit, proft profit...hum some seem to think that thats all a company sound be about. But if you don't have customers due to your comapnies activites then you got no company.

You misread it. The breakdown was:

1) Free access to general content on Gleemax (forums, errata fixes, general front-page news)
2) For-pay access to the "social" parts of Gleemax (the MySpace-like blog area and homebrew rules)*
3) D&D Insider (online gaming, character creator, "articles" updated 3 times per week and being compiled into Dragon & Dungeon monthly download "issues")
4) Downloadable ebook versions of 4e books that have been purchased (a small "unlock" fee, possibly requiring a D&DI subscription as well)

* This aspect of Gleemax may be included in the D&DI subscription cost, they hadn't finalized it yet.

 

[Kesh]

Maybe the D&D community can eventually establish something like VeriSign, and design guidelines or test cases could be developed with D&D 4th edition, but it certainly will take a lot of work.

The proposal I remember reading from the con was that the "big boys" (Green Ronin and such) would take on a similar role. You could approach them and enter an agreement to have your product published through their company, earning the d20 logo. If they felt your products were of good enough quality over time, they would grant your company equal status, and you would be able to publish other company's products under your own company name.

There's some concern about that, namely the amount of control these companies would have over smaller publishers and the amount of overhead this would drop on them. The alternative (Wizards approving the use of the d20 logo themselves) seemed not to go over well with WotC themselves. Finally, they considered dropping the logo licensing entirely, and just making everyone use OGL-only to sell their product on its own merits, without the marketing association the d20 logo gives to D&D.

Right now, the "Big Boys" approach seems to be the best compromise solution.

 

[Desdichado]

I don't see any reason why a 3rd party publisher couldn't reverse engineer a Modern 4E from the D&D 4E SRD. If WOTC isn't interested in doing their own Modern update, I don't think they would stop someone from publishing a 3rd party version.

I've already thought about doing exactly that myself, whether or not a 3rd party publisher does. Presumably it won't be all that difficult.

In fact, I've already thought of doing a d20 Modern "SAGA edition" using the SRD and making updates, notably to how skills are handled, as it is. Presumably that would be a nice stepping stone towards incorporating further changes based on 4e next summer sometime.

 

[Desdichado]

umm I think they call that breach of copyright!

And just because they don't want to does not mean they will allow others.

Ummm... there is a Modern SRD you know.

You've made some really bizarre claims in this thread.

 

[Ranger REG]

The problem for D&D is that there is no VeriSign equivalent yet, and also no framework on how to check for a D20 "worthy" product.

Maybe the D&D community can eventually establish something like VeriSign, and design guidelines or test cases could be developed with D&D 4th edition, but it certainly will take a lot of work.

If by "VeriSign equivalent," you mean the Covered Product must be fully in-sync with the rules? Are you saying the Trademark Usage Guide is not restrictive enough?

And as for "worthy" product, how does one define that? I mean what if I disagree with community representative panel if they don't think something like Dragonstar is worthy to carry the d20 logo but The Foundation d20 Superhero is?

 

[migo]

I dunno. Many devoted d20 Modern fans would rather their game be kept a far distance away from D&D. After all, when d20 Modern was announced, many fans didn't want many D&D-themed mechanics (like class-by-profession) to be repeated in the core rulebook.

Besides, D&D is a gear-dependant game. I play D&D so I can get the baddest magical (or artifact) arms, armors, and special items I can find.

Isn't that something they're trying to fix in 4e?

 

[Vigilance]

To encourage third-party publishers (big and small) to read and understand the nuance of the new rules before they make products based on them. That way we could lessen the flow of crappy products that may drown out the good ones in the market. I mean, who else besides me don't want to see another Foundation d20 superhero RPG?

That and, unlike the customer interest in 3e back in 1999-2000, 4e interest won't be as big.

Foundation is one example.

For another, the first two products I did for d20M, written very quickly after the release of the MSRD, were nominated for Ennies.