Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6140002" data-attributes="member: 82106">Yeah, to me 13A didn't seem terribly 4e-esque. It certainly shows some limited 4e influence and can play closer to a 4e style than many d20 games, but there are many really good parts of 4e that I missed in 13A. I thought some aspects of the game didn't work super well and seemed almost like "see, we did it different than 4e!" things. Still, its very well worth reading and trying out.As for the whole OGL/GSL/what is really WotC IP its sort of moot. The mere fact that there is a huge question mark over 4e material pretty much poisons the well. Nobody is going to want to find out exactly what WotC will or won't object to. Given that 4e ongoing will be a system with less and less active presence amongst players its hard to see why anyone would put a lot of work into a high quality 4e publication when you can simply create something for DDN, PF, 3.5, or some other variation of D&D without any need to worry about what WotC might do. Nobody would fight a C&D from them, regardless of how much you might think you're in the right. It seems to me like they're probably unlikely to get too peevish about adventures, especially ones that simply call out existing 4e mechanics and stat blocks as options in a system-neutral adventure or something like that. They might not get much bothered about a setting perhaps, but I doubt they'd be all that happy about a 'retro' clone of 4e. I think we're a lot more likely to see things like 13A that clearly reflect some elements of 4e style play but can solidly claim to be OGL games based off of material opened up in 3e, much like most 'OSR' games are doing.</blockquote>

Verification