• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

5E Gamehole Con Live Tweeting Perkins Panel

Nebulous

Explorer
What's wrong with competition? It works out better for the overall community.

Pathfinder didn't obtain the top spot because they were backed by deep pockets. They took the spot by producing more creative and interesting content. WotC should not be afraid of competition. Though I am surprised that the business people want an OGL. I think Mearls and the creative people won't mind at all. Many of the creative people make companies and produce content for the game like Monte Cooke or Sean K. Reynolds. I'd love to see Paizo get a shot to produce material for 5E. Their modules are top notch. They would add great stuff to the game.
No doubt they would make great stuff. And I would LOVE to see Paizo create 5e content...but i don't want Paizo to take the game and make Pathfinder 2.
 

sgtscott658

Villager
Wow, that DM screen at Gamehole Con looks awesome. And Ed Greenwood DM'ing!! I wonder if he was DM'ing 5E. Next year, I am going to Gamehole con. lol

Scott
 
Hmmm. How big is the list of brand new terms?
No idea. I'm sure there's not much.

For that reason, to a large extent it doesn't actually matter what WotC do - third party support will come anyway. So, more than anything, this is probably a symbolic thing; a matter of WotC publicly standing behind the OGL and third-party support, rather than just having to accept it.
 

Morrus

Administrator
Staff member
No idea. I'm sure there's not much.

For that reason, to a large extent it doesn't actually matter what WotC do - third party support will come anyway. So, more than anything, this is probably a symbolic thing; a matter of WotC publicly standing behind the OGL and third-party support, rather than just having to accept it.
I think it does matter. There are a lot of people - including myself - who wouldn't want to do it without WotC's blessing. It's a small industry. Stepping on toes is best avoided.
 
Wow, some great news there: OGL, Hollywood interest, another monster book eventually, and something not mentioned yet - great sales figures.

I seriously doubt the 5e license will be the exact same as the 3e OGL. There's no way they want another Pathfinder. That said, I don't know what the right answer is.
But...

Pathfinder only came about because WotC left 3.5 behind. If they stick with 5e and develop and evolve it instead, I doubt another Pathfinder could ever arise.
This. You took the words out of my mouth, although I would take it a step forward: Pathfinder came out not only because WotC left 3.5 behind, but because 4E didn't have the broad appeal they hoped for. A large chunk of the community wanted a more traditional game; couple this with the OGL and you have a context ripe not only for Pathfinder, but the OSR. Although I think it is more accurate to say that the birth year, or re-birth year, of the OSR was with Dragonsfoot in 1999 and then gained momentum with Dungeon Crawl Classics, Castles & Crusades, and then later Labyrinth Lord and the rest. In other words, by the time 4E came out the OSR was already thriving and thus wasn't as much reactive to 4E as it was to 3E.

Actually - that might be an important point to keep in mind. There's always going to be a revival and reaction to the new iteration of the game. It is simply inevitable. But the scale and degree of it can vary depending upon the edition itself, how WotC handles, etc. We can see the range of difference between the OSR which, what, accounts for a few percent at most of the total D&D fan-base? Versus Pathfinder, which actually took over the number one spot. Given that the reception of 5E is seemingly *much* better than 4E, and given that they're bringing back the OGL and overall seem much more attuned with "What the people want," I don't expect to see another Pathfinder. At most we might see Nerath: the RPG or Power Source or some other kind of 4E revival, but it would likely be small, and I'm not even sure if the licensing would allow for it.

This sucks.
after the great news of no kender I am super bumbed at the idea of an OGL... I was really hopeing for a much more limited license.
:(
... no it's not. It made for a far worse edition war over the last 5 years, and even made the overall community more fractured and tribal.
You're blaming this on the OGL? I think the "fracturing" and "etribalism" occurred a bit later than that, and that the worst edition war in my memory was in 2008-09, not back in the halcyon days of the OGL (2000-03ish).

BS... yes Piazo does a good job but lets not pretend that if they had to start from scratch instead of a prebuilt game it would be just as good. those deep pockets built the frame for piazo... they were just WotC deep pockets.
Yes, true, and people seem to forget that Paizo--whatever their strengths--are riding on the coat-tails of WotC and TSR. While I wouldn't applaud Paizo necessarily for excessive creativity or innovation, what I do applaud them for is how they handled their product. They did D&D right. They created a product format, and a quality level, that has set the standard for the last five years.

so would I.... just in a limited way.
You're being vague about what your problem is with the OGL, other than the possible relation to creating another Pathfinder and/or edition war, which to me is tenuous at best.
 

The_Gneech

Villager
I'm very much liking what I see here. I particularly applaud the comments about the little b/w cartoons in the 1E books. That was the first thing I noticed about the 5E PHB, was that the touches of whimsy were back, and that's actually very important. D&D is not a "comedy" game, but let's face it, there's a lot of ridiculous stuff in it, and "looking for buried treasure" is the essence of D&D, it was an apt comment.

All that stuff about the OGL, digital distribution, etc., is good too. :)

-The Gneech :cool:
 

tsadkiel

Villager
I seriously doubt the 5e license will be the exact same as the 3e OGL. There's no way they want another Pathfinder. That said, I don't know what the right answer is.
Limiting the license in the hopes of preventing another Pathfinder* would be closing the barn door after the horses have already eaten all the children. There's a Pathfinder now; people can already stick to an older edition of D&D with broad, high-quality support. Limiting the license won't do anything to prevent hypothetical future competitors, it just means that when third party publishers make cool stuff in the future, they're more likely to make it for the current actual and very strong competitor, giving people one more reason to play Pathfinder and one less reason to play D&D. In the current environment, I can't see a return to the OGL as anything but a positive.

*"Another Pathfinder" is pretty unlikely, anyway. Pathfinder only came about because of a perfect storm of factors, with the exact right people (with money from the WotC sale) who happened to have the exact right built-in audience and were motivated by the exact right delay in announcing the new license, which was exactly too restrictive.
 

Jester David

Villager
What jumped out at me was the phrase:
and assured folks present that "the role playing game is the heart of D&D, just like comics are for Marvel".
That's interesting as comics are at the heart of Disney's Marvel strategy as they mine the comics for characters, ideas, and storylines.

However, they do so in a way that offers almost zero support to the comics themselves.
The comics are mostly left on their own, struggling to make ends meet and continually having to reboot or pull events and stunts to maintain their dwindling fanbase and expected sales numbers. Meanwhile, the companies put restrictions on the books, like not creating any new mutant characters in the XBooks to avoid giving Fox more characters they can work with for those movies. And even ending the Fantastic Four comic to avoid giving the movie tie-in support (which suggests the people in charge don't know the comic business that well, as the comics have always relied on the movies to drive demand for the comics and boost sales...)
The comics are at the heart of Marvel but they're really there for nostalgia purposes as they no longer generate money or fans. They're the heart, but it's this weird vestigial heart.

I all but walked away from reading comic, getting two books from the Big Two (both Vertigo and ending soon) and have mostly moved onto Image. Comparing D&D to Marvel comics isn't reassuring to me...
 
What jumped out at me was the phrase:

That's interesting as comics are at the heart of Disney's Marvel strategy as they mine the comics for characters, ideas, and storylines.

However, they do so in a way that offers almost zero support to the comics themselves.
The comics are mostly left on their own, struggling to make ends meet and continually having to reboot or pull events and stunts to maintain their dwindling fanbase and expected sales numbers. Meanwhile, the companies put restrictions on the books, like not creating any new mutant characters in the XBooks to avoid giving Fox more characters they can work with for those movies. And even ending the Fantastic Four comic to avoid giving the movie tie-in support (which suggests the people in charge don't know the comic business that well, as the comics have always relied on the movies to drive demand for the comics and boost sales...)
The comics are at the heart of Marvel but they're really there for nostalgia purposes as they no longer generate money or fans. They're the heart, but it's this weird vestigial heart.

I all but walked away from reading comic, getting two books from the Big Two (both Vertigo and ending soon) and have mostly moved onto Image. Comparing D&D to Marvel comics isn't reassuring to me...
There's a big difference, though, between comics and D&D. Comics have a distinct timeline while D&D is "timeless." Sure, specific settings have a kind of canonical timeline, but not only do you not have to use them, but it is accepted and understand that everyone's own individual version--as the DM--is "canonical" to their own game. So if some big studio comes out with a D&D movie and kills off Drizzt (we can only hope), it isn't like it is conflicting with Realms canon or any of the thousands of Realms campaigns going on, and WotC couldn't have to change anything or account for anything.

We don't all have our own individual versions of what happens in the Marvel universe. It is an ongoing story, a "perennial myth," that we get to enjoy. But with roleplaying games, it is more that there are infinite universes, with the published canonical one being default but not absolute. I think that sort of implied understanding would make creating D&D movies a lot easier and less problematic.
 

kenmarable

Villager
5e under OGL would certainly make me happy both as a customer and to potentially dust off the writing skills (I haven't been this excited about RPG writing since back in 3.5).

But also an "Alice in Wonderland like story"?? I will try not to get my hopes up, but with "normal" D&D locations already being wondrous, what would be a Wonderland in comparison to, say, the Forgotten Realms? :) Even if it isn't "Alice in GreatWheelLand", I'm a big fan of really exotic magical locations, and am quite excited about that storyline from even that slight hint.
 

Jester David

Villager
There's a big difference, though, between comics and D&D. Comics have a distinct timeline while D&D is "timeless." Sure, specific settings have a kind of canonical timeline, but not only do you not have to use them, but it is accepted and understand that everyone's own individual version--as the DM--is "canonical" to their own game. So if some big studio comes out with a D&D movie and kills off Drizzt (we can only hope), it isn't like it is conflicting with Realms canon or any of the thousands of Realms campaigns going on, and WotC couldn't have to change anything or account for anything.

We don't all have our own individual versions of what happens in the Marvel universe. It is an ongoing story, a "perennial myth," that we get to enjoy. But with roleplaying games, it is more that there are infinite universes, with the published canonical one being default but not absolute. I think that sort of implied understanding would make creating D&D movies a lot easier and less problematic.
Yes, when you look at the product, they're very different. But from a business perspective, they're not dissimilar. They're a small niche product that caters to a small, dedicated fanbase of nerds, but the company that produces them is owned by a much, much larger company that views this product as irrelevant from a financial perspective but useful for generating Intellectual Property.

Hasbro likely doesn't care about individual versions of campaigns or a set timeline. They'll just look at see a source of characters and settings that can be plundered to form a mega-franchise like everyone in Hollywood seems to want now. D&D is a means to an end.

Saying "the tabletop RPG is to D&D what comics are to Marvel" doesn't engender hope. Because Marvel Entertainment and Disney doesn't give a crap about really broadening the comics or fixing that industry. They just want to keep making billion dollar movies. It's cheaper for them not to, because then they can continue to pay comic creators squat and buy characters and storylines for cheap.
With 60+ years of stories, they really don't *need* the comics any more. They've had nods to some modern characters and stories but the big Avengers storyline is leading up to a story that was written 25 years ago. They're fine to keep around but easy enough to get rid of once they become a financial burden. Comics could do great business for years focusing on omnibuses and collected editions, and that requires almost no staff.
D&D is similar. The tabletop RPG was great for generating IP but with 40 years of adventures and monsters and novels and settings, they don't *need* the RPG. It's nice to keep the game in print, but once the audience for the brand expands beyond (which a successful movie will do) the RPG becomes potentially superfluous.
 

Knightfall

World of Kulan DM
But also an "Alice in Wonderland like story"?? I will try not to get my hopes up, but with "normal" D&D locations already being wondrous, what would be a Wonderland in comparison to, say, the Forgotten Realms? :) Even if it isn't "Alice in GreatWheelLand", I'm a big fan of really exotic magical locations, and am quite excited about that storyline from even that slight hint.
They could be dusting off these modules: Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror.
 

kenmarable

Villager
D&D is similar. The tabletop RPG was great for generating IP but with 40 years of adventures and monsters and novels and settings, they don't *need* the RPG. It's nice to keep the game in print, but once the audience for the brand expands beyond (which a successful movie will do) the RPG becomes potentially superfluous.
It definitely is comparable, but (and I'm generally an optimistic person), hopefully the powers that be at Disney and Hasbro realize how useful it is to keep generating more IP to mine, and when you are throwing around hundreds of millions on CGI and tens of millions on cast members, paying the comics and RPG staff crap is an orders of magnitude below their notice (and I use the term "orders of magnitude" literally here - compare paying Jonathan Hickman writing the Avengers comic and paying Robert Downey Jr. to appear in the movies).

Even with decades of material to draw from, there is value in getting new material produced. Although their big upcoming storyline referencing something 25 years old, the upcoming Captain America storyline is from 2006-7, the massive hit with Guardians of the Galaxy is based on the team that's been around less than that, and the announced Captain Marvel movie I'm sure would never have happened if it hadn't been for Kelly Sue Deconnick and the Carol Corp fans on tumblr.

So, sure there are decades of material for both Disney and Hasbro to draw from. But it would be a really stupid business decision not to keep spending a relatively low amount of money compared to movie and TV budgets producing more material to draw from and expanding the dedicated fan base. (Dedicated fans along can't make a movie succeed, but they can be a reliable minimal revenue.) Sure businesses can be that stupid, but Disney/Marvel doesn't seem to be so far, and I hope Hasbro/WotC isn't either. It would be bad business to gut the comics or RPG once the tie-ins start doing well.
 

chibi graz'zt

Registered User
https://twitter.com/GameholeCon

Lots of interesting tidbits of information, including mention of a second Monster Manual and the return of OGL.
Confirming everything I hoped for with 5e. OGL is awesome, and electronic rulebooks double awesome! So awesome to see that stunning DM screen, already got it preordered and so happy to hear that the sales are astronomical.

But Im super excited about the planned storylines and that movies, TV and other media are being discussed. This could be the year of D&D being the great game that it used to be.

On a side note: where can I buy Perkins' beanie with the ampersand??
 
Last edited:

Jester David

Villager
It definitely is comparable, but (and I'm generally an optimistic person), hopefully the powers that be at Disney and Hasbro realize how useful it is to keep generating more IP to mine, and when you are throwing around hundreds of millions on CGI and tens of millions on cast members, paying the comics and RPG staff crap is an orders of magnitude below their notice (and I use the term "orders of magnitude" literally here - compare paying Jonathan Hickman writing the Avengers comic and paying Robert Downey Jr. to appear in the movies).

Even with decades of material to draw from, there is value in getting new material produced. Although their big upcoming storyline referencing something 25 years old, the upcoming Captain America storyline is from 2006-7, the massive hit with Guardians of the Galaxy is based on the team that's been around less than that, and the announced Captain Marvel movie I'm sure would never have happened if it hadn't been for Kelly Sue Deconnick and the Carol Corp fans on tumblr.

So, sure there are decades of material for both Disney and Hasbro to draw from. But it would be a really stupid business decision not to keep spending a relatively low amount of money compared to movie and TV budgets producing more material to draw from and expanding the dedicated fan base. (Dedicated fans along can't make a movie succeed, but they can be a reliable minimal revenue.) Sure businesses can be that stupid, but Disney/Marvel doesn't seem to be so far, and I hope Hasbro/WotC isn't either. It would be bad business to gut the comics or RPG once the tie-ins start doing well.
Normally I'd disagree. As D&D hasn't really generated any noteworthy new IP in years. The only newer monsters in 5e so far are the blights and drakes, both of which date back to 3e (and the twig blight's popularity is more accidental than intended). A lot of the newer stuff that made the transition from 3e to 4e hasn't returned: shadar kai, boneclaws, larva mage, etc. Even newer creatures like the dragonborn harken back to 1e and Dragonlance's draconians.

However... the new focus on story makes this a little easier. They could do a Tyranny of Dragons movie or Elemental Evil. By focusing on generating stories, the D&D team has made themselves a little more essential, a little less disposable, and made the job of screenwriters far easier.
However, that doesn't *really* require the TTRPG as the storylines are transmedia and the adventures are being outsourced.
 

Jester David

Villager
5e under OGL would certainly make me happy both as a customer and to potentially dust off the writing skills (I haven't been this excited about RPG writing since back in 3.5).

But also an "Alice in Wonderland like story"?? I will try not to get my hopes up, but with "normal" D&D locations already being wondrous, what would be a Wonderland in comparison to, say, the Forgotten Realms? :) Even if it isn't "Alice in GreatWheelLand", I'm a big fan of really exotic magical locations, and am quite excited about that storyline from even that slight hint.
My first thought would be the Feywild.
That allows them to add some magical whimsy while also having danger and creepiness. The adventurers are strangers in a strange land, dealing with illogical people that may not be entirely sane by human standards.

The feywild makes great sense as a superadventure location. They need to consider what will make a good story but also what will allow them to tie in a desired rules expansion, allow for new monsters, and give the media partners something to play with.
The feywild gives them an excuse to add more nature magic, to bring back the eladrin and other fey races, and explore the feywild from a player perspective. The feywild is also one of the least explored planes, making it a useful product even for people not playing 5e.
 

Dausuul

Legend
Holy guano, Batman.

This is phenomenal news. WotC was already knocking my socks off with this edition. They just knocked my feet off as well. I'm going to have to lurch to my FLGS on the bleeding stumps to pick up the DMG when it comes out.

The future of D&D is looking brighter to me than it has in years.
 

Advertisement

Top