Eric Noah's Info

[Razz]

What's the deal with minis anyway? It's too expensive to get alongside D&D books, and I have a way easier time and more options using programs like CC2 or Dundjinni to make my battlemaps. Also a hell of a lot cheaper, heh. Want to see how we handle battles?

Battle in Nightfang Spire

Creative aren't I? LOL Little blurry, it's a jpg so eh.

Anyways, as for 4E, I'm done. I'll be playing 3.5E till the day our gaming group dies. Looks like we'll have to be stuck doing the "crunch" creations and playtesting them for our games and relying on unnofficial FR lore. Oh well.

Kinda funny they're doing a 4E when Eberron was just created rather recently.

 

[philreed]

If WotC are planning to sell off the RPG side,

I don't think they'll sell it. License, yes.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

If WotC are planning to sell off the RPG side, I could see a logical sequence of events going something like:
- 2007: release 4e in a blaze of glory, enjoy a nice spike in sales for a year, and make some money.
- 2008: sell the RPG division before the 4e bloom wears off.

Anyone interested in acquiring the RPG side would want to do an Nth Edition as soon as possible, as that's where they will make the biggest and fastest chunk of change. The potential value to a buyer would decline in the wake of a 4th edition from Hasbro, as the new owner would face considerable risk introducing a new version too closely on its heels.

The RPG package is a lot more attractive to both Hasbro (in terms of selling it) and a potential buyer when the existing edition is approaching its nadir. Hasbro can get more for it as the new owner can push out the new edition fairly soon, and Hasbro doesn't have to do any of the R&D, etc., to make the money.

I'd think, though, that merely licensing the RPG rights would make more sense.

Edit: stop reading my mind and then typing faster, Phil.

 

[Khairn]

I'd announce the day after the convention. That way all the hate will be via e-mail.

joe b.

Very astute comment.

I'm not too worried about it as I have years worth of great RP'ing on hand even if I never bought another 3.? edition book. The comment that has me intrigued is the selling off of the RPG's. Now that could make things very interesting.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

I don't think they'll sell it. License, yes.

And that's the real danger to the possibility of a 4th ed. OGL

 

[philreed]

I'd think, though, that merely licensing the RPG rights would make more sense.

Agreed. The IP is worth too much to sell off any part of it.

 

[Nellisir]

Well, it doesn't matter much to me one way or another. I'm pretty well set on 3e and 3.5 books, and what I don't have I'll pick up after 4e comes out. I'll look at 4e, but it'll have to be pretty compatible with existing materials to be worth spending money on. The collectibles aspect of it doesn't interest me at all -- I realize I'm not hip, but I don't buy the minis for the D&D Minis game, nor do I play Magic, or MMORPGs. I'll still get the minis for my game, though -- it's not like I use the little cards.

The only thing I'd enjoy speculating on is who might be able to buy D&D, if WotC did indeed sell it, or license the game out:
White Wolf - experienced company, still dabbles in d20;
Paizo - heavily invested in D&D, already linked to D&D, Lisa Stevens has successful track record with WotC and high-end contacts;
Mongoose - continues to invest in d20 products, invests heavily in licenses, the D&D name would be a huge bonus;
Green Ronin - still dabbles in d20, would probably love to get the D&D brand name, but already has one certified hit with Mutants & Masterminds and a second potential hit with True20;
Malhavoc - obviously still in d20, but it's really a one man operation, I'm not sure he can easily get the financing;
and finally,
Peter....I'm blanking on the name...WotC's founder and ex-CEO, the man that bought TSR the LAST time...probably has the money, can almost certainly get the money, and I believe is no longer restricted from working in the RPG industry.

I heart the OGL so, so, much.

 

[SteveC]

My other question in this area comes in terms of the OGL. A lot of comment has come around the idea that 4E won't be open any more. I see that as a strong possibility.

My question is that since the OGL is a forever license, wouldn't wotc have to make some pretty serious changes to the game in order to not be using open game mechanics? What I mean by this is that if we use our same ability scores: str, int, wis, dex, con and cha, and the same rating system with a range of 3-18 and ability bonuses, all of that content is open and if joe publisher wants to keep using it, there's nothing that can be done about it.

Now if the change was made to just using ability bonuses, based around a zero average, it's too bad, because those rules are also already open content through third party publishers.

I guess what I'm saying is that if wotc were to want to "close" the system again, they'd actually have to make some significant changes to it in order to do so.

Now they would, of course, have real legal representation on their behalf, but wouldn't enforcing a non-open use of mechanics created under an open source license really destroy the entire industry pretty effectively?

So those more in the know, tell me how I'm wrong...

--Steve

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

How does the whole OGL/D20 license thing work if WotC changes to 4E? Can companies like Green Ronin, Mongoose etc. still produce OGL or D20 books based on the 3.5 or 4E rules? Or is this coming edition change going to kill them?

The OGL genie is out of the bottle. So if your game is only OGL, and not d20, (like Mutants & Masterminds or Castles & Crusades, or even OSRIC, for that matter), a change to 4E will not affect your system. However, if your game is d20, you're operating under tighter restrictions. You can't describe the process for creating a character, you can't describe a process for applying the effects of experience to a character, can't include miniatures, etc. Also, while the OGL explicitly states that you don't have to use the most updated version of the license, the d20 license says that "Wizards of the Coast may issue updates and/or revisions to this License without prior notice. You will conform in all respects to the updated or revised terms of this License. Subsequent versions of this License will bear a different version number."

That said, I would imagine that it's possible to create a non-d20, but OGL rules set that mimics d20 in almost all respects (although it couldn't call itself "d20"). Game rules/algorithms are not subject to copyright law, so as long as you don't infringe on any trademarks, use original or licensed (i.e. OGL) descriptions of game rules/algorithms to avoid copyright infringement, and abide by the terms of any license you do take advantage of (e.g. OGL, again), you wouldn't be breaking any laws.

Take a look at what was done with OSRIC. It was created using the OGL. Something similar could be done with a different edition in mind, if the 3E core rules were no longer readily available.

Frankly, I don't like the direction WotC is taking the game either, and there are several variants of the system that I like better....AE, AGOT, and possibly True20 among others. And I'm reading Conan, and liking what I've seen so far. Can those games continue selling?

If they're OGL-based, but not d20 (like True20, for example), then there's no problem at all. If they're d20 licensed products, then it's a stickier issue.

 

[Nellisir]

Agreed. The IP is worth too much to sell off any part of it.

I'd do 4th Edition, link it to the D&D miniatures game as much as humanly possible, license out traditional RPG development rights (using the 4e base ruleset) to a few companies (see my earlier post) , and end the d20 license.

It'd allow WotC to retain IP control, retain the Minis, farm out the low-profit work, eliminate print d20 confusion, and cut the pdf publishers lose to survive on the OGL or their own IP.