GSL questions for Scott Rouse and Mike Lescault

[Orcus]

And of course we are just guessing how the GSL will differ from the OGL, but the feeling I get is that WotC considers "compatible" game systems (ie Conan, True20, M&M, et al) as an undesirable effect of the OGL. I'm guessing that the GSL will not allow for that. And I would call that a slightly reduced sight, at least.

I'd call it a wise business move on their part. I'd do the same thing. I dont think when Ryan started open gaming that the goal was to create competing games. It was to support D&D and be an externality driving the sale of PHBs. I dont mind them closing that loophole. Then again, I dont publish one of those competing games.

 

[Lizard]

Hi All,

I haven't forgotten about the questions. I chatted with people about it internally to see what information we could provide, and while I could give you some quoted answers right now, they'd be kinda lame because there are still so many unanswered questions.

I'm going to be out of the office for the next week or so, but when I am back, we'll hopefully have more information available so we can give some better answers.

Thanks,
-Mike

That's kinda scary, as it implies the GSL is still over a week from release...

 

[Admiral Caine]

Hi All,

I haven't forgotten about the questions. I chatted with people about it internally to see what information we could provide, and while I could give you some quoted answers right now, they'd be kinda lame because there are still so many unanswered questions.

I'm going to be out of the office for the next week or so, but when I am back, we'll hopefully have more information available so we can give some better answers.

Thanks,
-Mike

I'd like to echo Henry's sentiments. We all appreciate you checking in back in, and I'm sure we all look forward to any news you have next week.

Thanks again!

 

[Oldtimer]

I'd call it a wise business move on their part. I'd do the same thing. I dont think when Ryan started open gaming that the goal was to create competing games. It was to support D&D and be an externality driving the sale of PHBs. I dont mind them closing that loophole. Then again, I dont publish one of those competing games.

Neither do I.

I don't think it was a goal for Ryan to create competing games, but I think he realized the possibility. Since competing games will always be created, closing the "loophole" will just cause them to be incompatible with D&D, ie less of an externality driving PHB sales.

One can apply exactly the same reasoning towards "competing" d20 games, as you did above towards "competing" D&D accessories. They all work to make the D&D market stronger, since people can mix and match products. If you bought Conan and play it, you could easily pick up a WotC Monster Manual to spice things up. More customers and less resistance to try D&D.

So, it might not be such a great business move.

 

[xechnao]

Imagine CODA (LotR, ST) was open. Imagine Star Wars was CODA too. In this case I can easily see CODA Conan, Dragonlance, CoC....

If Wotc did not have Star Wars, D20 and OGL could have not even existed.

Wotc and d&d biggest bet is Brand name(s like) Star Wars. Not D20 or OGL. Wotc Dungeons & Dragons sells more due to Wotc Star Wars than due to OGL.

And regarding marketing it was not random that Star Wars got updated first and D&D second and they linked each other (SAGA is a preview of 4th Ed they have been saying).

The above points get proven by the small success of open systems like savage worlds or tri-stat (BESM). The market value is more geek value than true value (what it offers).

At this point of D20 being associated with geeky important brand names already, Wotc and D&D perhaps has less to win with opening their system and more to lose. A close 4th Ed will rise its geek value more or to put it differently an open 4th Ed will lower its geek value.

 

[kenmarable]

That's kinda scary, as it implies the GSL is still over a week from release...

Mike's just passing information to us as the Online Community Liaison (or whatever his title is). Him taking a week off has no impact on the writing of the GSL. He just said he can't get us answers to the questions until he is back.

Now maybe it is still a week or more away given all the unanswered questions he had. Or maybe those in charge are having a meeting today to determine everything and get the GSL out to third party publishers, but they won't have time to talk to Mike before he leaves to answer his questions. So it could still be released anytime between today and, oh... June.

Basically, you can't read anything about the timing of the GSL into his response other than "yesterday afternoon they didn't have the answers for him".

 

[Cergorach]

If Wotc did not have Star Wars, D20 and OGL could have not even existed.

No offense, but from what I have seen (look at amazon.com for example), sales for D&D far outweigh sales for SW. And while SW is similar to D&D, it isn't directly compatible (genre). While most things released under the OGL are compatible with D&D and thus directly strengthen the position of D&D in the market place. If WotC/LucasArt had released a SW SRD and allowed the use of the term "Requires the use of the Star Wars rulebook", then the OGL could increase the position of the SW game.

The OGL market created a diversity of products that is to date unrivaled in the RPG industry, all based on the same game system, and most assume you'll be using the supplement with the D&D rules. Sure there are some variant systems that grew from the OGL (M&M, Conan, True20, Spycraft, etc.), but to be honest, these have become so different from the D&D game that they're no longer really compatible with it. And thus do not really benefit from the OGL, I would say that they're actually hindered by it (needing to release their content under the OGL). I would go so far as to say that if there was no OGL, these variant systems would have been created in some form or another, the only problem would have been that they wouldn't have had the exposure they now benefit from (due to the OGL).

While I'm disappointed that the GSL won't open up the rules as the OGL did, it does have the added benefit of focusing folks on the D&D brand and compatibility with it. In exchange it seems that WotC is opening up more of their IP, something I always found strange before. While you were encouraged to support 3.x, supporting their support material wasn't easy (maybe if you asked nicely), why reinvent the wheel if WotC already did a marvelous job on it. WotC did a wonderfull Samurai, how many variant Samurai were presented in numerous rules supplements by third part publishers? If you could include the Samurai class from WotC by stating "The Samurai class is taken from Oriental Adventures published by WotC.", this would interest folks in that book, while saving publishers the time of 'inventing' a new class.

 

[xechnao]

No offense, but from what I have seen (look at amazon.com for example), sales for D&D far outweigh sales for SW.

This is irrelevant. Star Wars could have sold 0 rpg books and still my point be valid the same. Star Wars is the booster geek attraction -that adds to the D&D sales- not the actual product to sell. Because Star Wars universe may be less suited or attractive for a roleplaying game experience than D&D.

Think of tourism. You pay hotel rooms and services but you would rather choose a location for your holidays with a high value of sight seeing.

 

[Ranger REG]

This is irrelevant. Star Wars could have sold 0 rpg books and still my point be valid the same. Star Wars is the booster geek attraction -that adds to the D&D sales- not the actual product to sell. Because Star Wars universe may be less suited or attractive for a roleplaying game experience than D&D.

Oh, please. :\

You make it sound like the reason Magic: The Gathering sell is because at one time WotC was selling Pokemon TCG.

I'm gonna tell you again. We don't need Star Wars to sell D&D. We have a much bigger RPG fanbase than Star Wars RPG fanbase (counting the d6 gamers too).

 

[Crashy75]

Neither do I.

I don't think it was a goal for Ryan to create competing games, but I think he realized the possibility. Since competing games will always be created, closing the "loophole" will just cause them to be incompatible with D&D, ie less of an externality driving PHB sales.

One can apply exactly the same reasoning towards "competing" d20 games, as you did above towards "competing" D&D accessories. They all work to make the D&D market stronger, since people can mix and match products. If you bought Conan and play it, you could easily pick up a WotC Monster Manual to spice things up. More customers and less resistance to try D&D.

So, it might not be such a great business move.

So, I'm getting the impression that there won't be any variant PHB's... That would make me very sad. My wife and wallet will be happy however. Those games never stopped me from purchasing WotC stuff. They did excite me about d20 however.