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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wulf Ratbane" data-source="post: 4174690" data-attributes="member: 94">Utterly incorrect. The OGL is not a license that can be revoked or changed (in any meaningfully detrimental way).You may be confusing the OGL with the d20 STL. There is nothing inherent to adopting the OGL that creates a reliance on WotC's property. The d20 STL, yes. OGL, no.Ryan's point (precisely correct, IMO) was that all future editions of D&D would be Open, because any edition of D&D that was far enough removed from the (irrevocably) Open version that it could not be derived from the Open version (whether by WotC or some other entity) would be rejected by the players.4e certainly does not fit that criteria. It is still a distinct possibility that some entity will create a derivative version of 3e that is compatible with 4e. Such a version would have everything necessary to "compete" with the official version of 4e except for the Dungeons and Dragons brand-- which of course, is no small thing.The 4e GSL provides publishers with a new SRD to bootstrap them into the new edition. That's good. It also provides them with the significant advantage of being able to put a D&D compatibility mark on their products. That's beyond good, that's frakkin' amazing. Unfortunately, it also requires 3PP to abandon their old OGL lines. That's really bad. The biggest, brightest, best publishers, the ones with a proven track record for innovative design and the ability to provide ongoing support for those product lines, are the ones hardest hit.</blockquote>

Verification