Getting OSRIC/AD&D into FLGS and publishers

[Mark]

That was my point in raising the issue of TLG and K&C also aligning with NG's commentary: their support of Clark's statements seemed to be perpetuating the "legal concerns" mindset in the gaming public, despite any concerns raised by WotC on that front, or any concrete evidence being brought to bear in conjunction with these "issues".

I'd like to hear/see more concrete information on what might be in violation. The lack of action on the part of WotC, even as simple as a C&D for more blatant violations, leaves me skeptical of the opinions from these other quarters.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

See, this is the idea that i hate to see repeated on "legality" threads. That a company takes no action has no relevance for the legal situation. They could simply wait for he next fiscal year to begin suing, could wait for a better PR situation, could wait for a certain key event etc.
Thats like saying "i was speeding, but because nobody sent me a ticket i doubt that i did anything wrong, legally."

 

[nightraven]

OSRIC is LEGAL (until some specific clear argument is articulated or its proven in court..."spirit" -don't cut it). I suggest everyone stop giving the impression OSRIC is anything but legal. your really doing harm to the owners of the IP of OSRIC. Intentional or not, Your rumor spreading and fear mongering by just repeating over and over the opinion of "industry experts" (who happen to be in direct competition with OSRIC pushing their own brand of cola). YOU ARE HURTING SOMEONE ELSES CAUSE WITHOUT LEGAL OR MORAL FOOTING. Personally, if I held the IP for OSRIC I would go after some of these clowns for defamation.

Its as if we (the community) took a handful of mud and smeared it all over OSRIC's nice new white shirt. Even though OSRIC has survived ANY legal argument, it still has mud all over it, and thus no one wants to stick mud on the cover of their module (OSRIC doesn't stand for what it used to, its soiled and damaged). WOTC doesn't have to lift a finger, we did it for them, along with a small group of spiteful publishers (TLG doesn't even allow OSRIC talk on their site, please).

Sorry for the rant, but I was hoping people would suggest things to build OSRIC support, not once again spread fear and tear it down. OSRIC is as legal as any other book or product floating around until proven in court (or at least a serious flaw is pointed out). Your playing the pawn by repeating "industry insiders". And your making it that much more likely that companies on the fence won't climb over (and instead opt out to use 1E compatible, the inferior alternative). We don't have the right to do that (cause fear and thus change outcomes), not without real reason. Its like spreading a rumor someone's a child molester without evidence, who'd want to get near that person or hire them for a job. I know thats not what you guys are intending to do (Umbran for one) but thats what it amounts to. You really have to think about what you post, and balance free communication and the harm that can cause (what you write online is read by 1000s). Finch and Marshal are the ones that will suffer from our actions. And as far as I can tell, both are nice guys. They deserve better. And OSRIC deserves an untarnished reputation. Look at how EXPR has opted out of using OSRIC for its latest monster book (and who knows, dropping OSRIC altogether). No doubt a response to what I mentioned above, baseless fear of the boogie man. Its sad really.

 

[Maggan]

Sorry for the rant, but I was hoping people would suggest things to build OSRIC support, not once again spread fear.

I'm sorry, but if you ask why publishers aren't jumping to the glorious opportunity that is OSRIC, one answer will be that doubts about its legality is one such reason.

The fact remains that whatever the legal status of OSRIC, some publishers are hesitant to use it, due to them not being as convinced of its legal status as you are. And its their businesses, their money, and their risk to take or not to take, as the case might be.

It was the same thing with the OGL and the d20STL. There were people who decided that using those was not a risk they were willing to take. And risk management is a cornerstone of building a business, and we all make different assessments based on different goals, circumstances and capabilities. And of course, projected return on investment.

/M

 

[nightraven]

Thats just it Maggan, the publishers (and their employees) so far mentioned that are poopooing OSRIC 1. have no specific reasons (just "its too risky") and 2. have already established brands in direct competition with OSRIC. Its very likely their objections are based on scaring others from using it to limit competition (not from some real fear of being sued). The five or six established "old school" publishers didn't want weeds like EXPR growing in their garden. WE are accidently helping them pull those weeds and poisening others (it appears EXPR is one such weed about to be pulled out by the roots, I hope I'm wrong). There is honestly no more chance of WOTC taking OSRIC to court than any other OGL user, so why do we as a community pick on OSRIC.

Maggan, I understand your point. I did ask. But posters should make it clear that the legal reasons some companies bring up may be a smoke screen. Its just the honorable thing to do (mentioning both sides of the story, espl. when its so obvious established brands will loose out to a multitude of companies supporting one other then their own).

Like I mentioned above, we have to be careful with the internet, free communication vs. spreading fear and causing real damage. A responsible poster should consider the effects of what they post and do their best to walk carefully when what they say can do real world damage to someones profits or dreams, as hokey as that may sound. Honestly, if you had to guess, would you say TLGs objection to using OSRIC has to do with legal reasons (fearing a lawsuit and having to destroy a few 100 copies of some module) or economic (fearing dozens of new OSRIC/1E AD&D publishers popping up out of thin air flooding the market with quality modules more "old school" then their d20-light C&C system (espl. now that Gygax is dead). Its a no-brainer, and the fact that guys like Umbran don't mention it (since thats just as likely the reason as any) makes one wonder if he's not anti-OSRIC (perhaps not wanting to see 1E make a comback). I don't mean to pick on Umbran, and I'm sure he's got nothing against OSRIC or 1E, but you get my point, be objective and complete if your real goal is being objective and informative. Perhaps I'm just cutting hairs, who knows.
:-(

 

[Maggan]

Look at how EXPR has opted out of using OSRIC for its latest monster book (and who knows, dropping OSRIC altogether). No doubt a response to what I mentioned above, baseless fear of the boogie man.

XPR was doing that to test whether stamping OSRIC on a book has any value. It's a litmus test, market research to evaluate the value of the OSRIC name. The results, when in, would be very interesting to other publishers.

Browning said this, when this was brought up at Grognardia:

Malevolent and Benign isn't listed as an OSRIC product because we're testing to see if a lack of OSRIC branding for a 1e product affects sales.

So, it's nothing more than a market information gathering choice and isn't representative of any type of switch of support of OSRIC. Our Advanced Adventures line will continue to be OSRIC-branded. In fact, we've got 3 more in the pipeline right now.

From here: GROGNARDIA: OSRIC is Mine

/M

 

[Maggan]

2. have already established brands in direct competition with it.

Yes and no, IMO.

Necro isn't doing anything at the moment, and they've been strong supporters of D&D from the get go. D&D as a brand, that is. They want to produce stuff for the latest version of D&D, which naturally excludes OSRIC.

Now, they are planning to support Pathfinder, but that's a no-brainer for them, being a partner of Paizo and having tons of experience working with the 3.x rules.

As for TLG, yes they have C&C, which was released before OSRIC if I remember correctly, and that could be said to be in direct competition with OSRIC. For sure, up until the release of the clones, I think C&C was considered a poster child for the old school proto-movement, something it lost when the clones marched onto the scene.

But I rather think that Troll Lords really want to focus on their set of rules, understandably. If I was a publisher, I'd do the same. Why adopt someone else's rules, when you have your own? There needs to be no malice involved to explain that.

The five or six established "old school" publishers didn't want weeds like EXPR growing in their garden.

Apart from Necro and Troll Lords, I'm not familiar with the companies that are considered established old school publishers. Could you name them for me, so I can check them out?

I guess Pied Piper Publishing is one, maybe.

But my basic point is, that there doesn't have to be any ulterior motives for an old school publisher not to support OSRIC.

I think the largest obstacle, barring any legalities, is the fact that OSRIC has no company driving it. It has been released, but the leadership that e.g. Paizo is showing with Pathfinder, isn't there. That in itself will relegate OSRIC to being a niche player in a niche environment.

And if I'm not mistaken, that is also what the creators of OSRIC were aiming for. Nothing more, nothing less. They weren't planning or hoping for OSRIC to take the gaming world by storm, they wanted the rules out there for people to reference, and maybe help some people discover or re-discover the old school style of play.

It was never about taking over the world, never about storming the castle and reclaiming the crown of D&D in the eye of the gaming public. It was about opening a door to another gaming experience, to let others check it out. To suggest a baseline for publishers to work with, if they so chose.

/M

 

[Nikosandros]

Thats like saying "i was speeding, but because nobody sent me a ticket i doubt that i did anything wrong, legally."

Actually, what I'm seeing here is people saying: Ha! I know you were speeding on the highway, you're just lucky you weren't caught. I won't offer evidence that you were speeding, but I'll keep slandering you just the same.

 

[Maggan]

Hey, it makes it difficult to respond to your posts if you keep editing them all the time!

Honestly, if you had to guess, would you say TLGs objection to using OSRIC has to do with legal reasons (fearing a lawsuit and having to destroy a few 100 copies of some module) or economic (fearing dozens of new OSRIC/1E AD&D publishers popping up out of thin air flooding the market with quality modules more "old school" then their d20-light C&C system (espl. now that Gygax is dead).

I'd say that there were several reasons. Let's pretend that I am Troll Lords. My reasoning would go like this:

"Hmmmm, we have C&C, and an established fan base. But people are talking about this OSRIC thing ... let's see.

1. It's not backed by another company. Both good (no competition from them) and bad (no one aggressively building brand value that I can benefit from).

2. Market potential. If I'm lucky, it seems as if I can sell 100 copies of the books. Doesn't sound so hot, we're doing a lot better with C&C, or at least not worse.

3. It was created under very special circumstances, by people knowledgeable in IP law, and they claim that it's legal. Also, if anyone gets sued, it won't be me, but them. Maybe. Hmmmm ... some question marks there as to what the legal situation is. I think it's no or little risk, but I can't be sure.

4. Not all old school fans love OSRIC. Some hate it, some love it. It doesn't seem to be the rallying banner of old school play that some people are hoping it to be.

All in all, I think I'll pass. And those OSRIC people, they make my fans upset, so it seems like I'll have to ban OSRIC discussion on my boards as well. Why can't people just get along? Sigh ..."

That seems more likely a scenario to me, than them being mean-spirited and scared of the potential competition.

/M

 

[Ariosto]

I see Maggan has posted Joe Browning's statement.

The OSRIC brand is just one option for publishers. If "first edition" (or even "compatible with First Edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons®") becomes more popular, then that may warm of the hearts of some AD&D fans; replacing the beloved game was not at all the original intent.