Feelings About 4e vrs Feelings About the GSL
- Thread starter Scribble
- Start date
Rodrigo Istalindir
Explorer
From how I'm reading the GSL, it will make the kind of 3rd party stuff I'd like to see for 4e non-viable, so it makes me a little less forgiving of 4e in general.
Now we wait for the other shoe to drop with the fansite rules.
Now we wait for the other shoe to drop with the fansite rules.
TimeOut
First Post
Great poll, simple answer: I like 4e but dislike or cannot work with the GSL.
I understand the main intentions behind the GSL but in the end they are to restrictive and too much of a trap to continue converting my setting into 4e. Even if 4e would be the perfect system, I can't afford all the legal hassle and especially the "no redefinition" clause that comes with the GSL.
I understand the main intentions behind the GSL but in the end they are to restrictive and too much of a trap to continue converting my setting into 4e. Even if 4e would be the perfect system, I can't afford all the legal hassle and especially the "no redefinition" clause that comes with the GSL.
2WS-Steve
First Post
Like 4e, not so sure about GSL.
Which is too bad, because 4e is a system that could really benefit from lots of support. Remember all those droves of spell books for 1e, 2e, and 3e? Now every character class can benefit from books like that.
I've also noticed that the Dragon articles are starting to help add some non-combat abilities to the class lists. I'd like to see a lot more of that.
Which is too bad, because 4e is a system that could really benefit from lots of support. Remember all those droves of spell books for 1e, 2e, and 3e? Now every character class can benefit from books like that.
I've also noticed that the Dragon articles are starting to help add some non-combat abilities to the class lists. I'd like to see a lot more of that.
I think I'll manage with the GSL, as it's not really that much more restrictive than much of the other things I do when I delve into the business aspect of this hobby. I'll probably make some 4e adventures and sell them at my FLGS for low price to get him some profit, and a few other small market things. I can easily redefine monsters and redo the stat blocks , or create new monsters as case may be, so I don't have too much of a problem.
I think the initial shock has worn off a bit, and I suspect it won't be too hard to snake around the things I need to.
I think the initial shock has worn off a bit, and I suspect it won't be too hard to snake around the things I need to.
ZSutherland
First Post
I have really, really enjoyed my time so far with 4e. KotS, even poorly designed as the encounters and pregens are, was a breeze to run. My players had a great time (except my poor wife who simply could not roll above an 8 on a d20 for most of the three nights we worked on it before 6/6). I even had a player at the table who had never, ever played a table-top rpg in his life. I gave him a 10 minute basic rules introduction, he was kind of hesitant for about the frst 15 minutes, and then he was off and running like he'd been doing it for years.
A buddy of mine is running a beer-and-pretzels style game that's more testing out the system than anything long-term, but that's been very fun as well.
Unfortunately, I'm so disheartened by the GSL that I may take a pass on the rest of 4E. Doubtless, we'll play with the 3 core books we have, but I'm going to have to give a long, hard think before I give any more money to WotC.
I understand their motives, or at least what I assume to be their motives, and I don't think it's unfair of them to do what they've done, or dishonest, or whatever. I think it's patently foolish. I think it's bad for the industry, bad for consumers, and will ultimately prove to be bad for WotC. If WotC got nothing else out of the OGL-era, the third party publishers provided a way for WotC to scout (relatively risk free) for the best talent in the industry. That alone is worth the very minimal sales losses that might have resulted from True20, Spycraft, et al.
A buddy of mine is running a beer-and-pretzels style game that's more testing out the system than anything long-term, but that's been very fun as well.
Unfortunately, I'm so disheartened by the GSL that I may take a pass on the rest of 4E. Doubtless, we'll play with the 3 core books we have, but I'm going to have to give a long, hard think before I give any more money to WotC.
I understand their motives, or at least what I assume to be their motives, and I don't think it's unfair of them to do what they've done, or dishonest, or whatever. I think it's patently foolish. I think it's bad for the industry, bad for consumers, and will ultimately prove to be bad for WotC. If WotC got nothing else out of the OGL-era, the third party publishers provided a way for WotC to scout (relatively risk free) for the best talent in the industry. That alone is worth the very minimal sales losses that might have resulted from True20, Spycraft, et al.
You should probably have included ambivalence. I like 4e and don't care about the GSL. I don't believe in the advantages it allegedly provides to the hobby writ large, and I never buy 3rd party products. But 3rd party products make other people happy, and I don't begrudge them that, as long as they don't try to convince me of wacky things.
Ruin Explorer
Legend
TimeOut said:
Same position here, and same main complaint.
Similar Threads
