GSL questions for Scott Rouse and Mike Lescault

[Orcus]

I was a bit grouchy today, and it came through in my posts. I posted some thoughts I was having. But that shouldnt change the fact that I trust the people at Wizards to do this and to do it right. I know Linae and Scott are good people. I know this will get ironed out.

Though I have that belief, even I am given to human fits of impatience. Of course, part of that is Linae teasing me about how cool her 4E game is... which is just cruel

My timetable is simply not Wizards' time table (no matter how much I think they should be the same). Or I should say that the other way around: their timetable is not my timetable. Some things just take time.

Clark

 

[Goblinoid Games]

"New edition" sounds like we give you the improvements you need. "Old edition feel" sounds like we actively put and keep something else you need too.

Thus what we give you is something better than the old edition and also has to be better than the new edition.

It is marketing speech.

Ahhhh ok. Assuming we need new "improvements" to begin with. That's also marketing. Good point you have there.

 

[xechnao]

Yeah, well, you spoke for me pretty well.

Look, D&D has always grown and evolved. There have been things with every edition I didnt like and other parts that were great. I think 4E will be no different.

This is a purely hypothetical question to you:
Suppose that a new system hits the market tomorrow and after you check it you think it is so amazingly awesome. But it is not from Wotc, it is not D&D. It lacks the brand power but as a game at its premise you think it is better. You have the possibility to make the products you want to make for that system and support it but you know that it lacks the commercial trust of D&D. What will you do?

 

[Dark Mistress]

Yeah, well, you spoke for me pretty well.

Look, D&D has always grown and evolved. There have been things with every edition I didnt like and other parts that were great. I think 4E will be no different.

Well I practically live on the Necro forums, I would hope by now i at least have a clue about your likes ect. You are pretty open and vocal which helps, but still it is never wise to put words in another person mouth even if you think your right. Like I did earlier.

 

[Orcus]

This is a purely hypothetical question to you:
Suppose that a new system hits the market tomorrow and after you check it you think it is so amazingly awesome. But it is not from Wotc, it is not D&D. It lacks the brand power but as a game at its premise you think it is better. You have the possibility to make the products you want to make for that system and support it but you know that it lacks the commercial trust of D&D. What will you do?

When that game arrives, ask me.

Right now, there is not even any game close to what you describe--for me, anyway.

I dont care if it is Wizards or not. I care about D&D. That said, I think so far Wizards has done a good job caretaking my favorite game and hobby. They have done alot to distance themselves from the bad will T$R created. They havent been perfect, but then who is. I hope they keep up the trend of distancing themselves from the horrible decisions made by T$R in the alleged name of business that nearly ruined D&D.

Clark

 

[AZRogue]

I want to add my voice to Clark's, here: I don't think WotC will nix a good GSL (I've just been very annoyed at their unprofessional delays). Why do I think they will produce an effective GSL? Because I don't think WotC can possibly be that ignorant. I don't think it's really possible to drop down to the level necessary to do away with Open Gaming and still be intelligent enough to, say, use a telephone, or pour yourself a glass of water.

I think there might be some trouble passing a usable GSL past the legal people, and I think that is where the delays are coming from. I don't believe that the company is going to retract the one truly great thing that it has accomplished. The ill will that would be generated amongst those who actually really, really want to like the new edition would be incredible.

Maybe I'm just grouchy too, but I think that it's imperative that WotC continues to honor its commitment to open gaming. They gave some very good reasons why they should, backed by some very insightful market research. To suddenly turn their backs on that, for any reason, would be very disheartening. I really hope that my faith isn't misplaced and I hope that someone, somewhere, gives somebody permission to speak and put our minds at ease, because the "official" statement relayed so far really sounded like they were taking "three steps back."

 

[Cergorach]

I care about D&D.

What is D&D to you? It was 3.0E, then 3.5E, obviously your very excited about 4E. But what about Pathfinder RPG? It doesn't have the D&D brand name, but it's essentially 3.5E with enhancements. What I'm trying to say, do you follow the D&D brand name or is D&D something more then the D&D brand name? Where do you draw the line? Would Exalted with the D&D brand be D&D to you (I hope that made any sense)?

I would hate to see the 3rd party publisher go the way of the dodo for 4E, but with the whole mess of the GSL (hinted at limitations), I am not as excited about 4E as some. Paizo did what I hoped someone would do, continue working under the OGL with was D&D to me.

No GSL would mean very little to the core of the current pro 4E players, but those that it does matter to are often DMs/GMs that represent their gaming group(s). If those decide that the GSL/OGL is important to them and go with the alternative of Pathfinder (or one of the other OGL games), then it isn't just one player gone, it's entire groups gone. If I look at my own situation, I dragged 5 people with me into 3E, then into 3.5E. While not everyone bought every D&D/FR book, my little group was responsible for $1000s in sales, I know we're not unique. While our 3.5E game has died, in very much the same way as our 2E game died, I'm interested in resurrecting my old gaming group (I'm sure that I'm not the only one). With the rumours of 4E it seemed like a good time to try, but with the GSL announcement and some of the decisions that were made, it seemed less like a good idea to me. For me the OGL represents a certain amount of freedom, the GSL less so, but still better then none. As the needs of my friends have changed, I need to do a lot of work for Pathfinder or D&D 4E anyway. Having been around to witness the TSR crackdown on D&D fan material on the web, I don't want to worry about such a thing repeating itself, or be condemned to Gleemax...

 

[Ydars]

I just cancelled my pre-order for 4E. I have been really excited by the design ideas and some of the new mechanics, but if WoTC go back preventing gamers from participating in developing D&D, then I am bailing out and finding another system. I will buy 4E only if there is a GSL that allows fans and 3 party publishers to make substantial material for 4E.

I do so because, to me, the OGL/GSL is an expression of respect; a contract between WoTC and us, the players of the game. It is a recognition that WE are D&D, not a group of designers in some company. TSR made the mistake of believing that THEY were D&D and look where it got them. Without GSL, D&D will go the way it did with TSR, with an increasingly alienated fan-base peeling off and playing other games. This is not because the OGL is important in itself, but because it is a sign of who is in control at WoTC.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I do so because, to me, the OGL/GSL is an expression of respect; a contract between WoTC and us, the players of the game. It is a recognition that WE are D&D, not a group of designers in some company.

Um...

I'm as big a supporter of the OGL as anyone. I wouldn't be working for WotC today if I hadn't gotten on board with some of the other D20 companies. I'll be very upset if there's no OGL/GSL this time around.

But...

How does it make any sense to abandon D&D for another closed system? There really aren't that many open RPGs out there. Almost all RPGs are designed by "designers in some company." In fact, even at the height of the OGL, the products on the shelves were created by "designers in some company."

I'm all for the license, and I'm all for making it clear to WotC that we want said license, but this particular argument makes no sense to me.

 

[Goblinoid Games]

How does it make any sense to abandon D&D for another closed system?

I don't think he said that, or which system he'd switch to, in his above post. Did I miss something? Well, Pathfinder will be open it seems. Also I haven't heard what Mongoose will be doing with their 3.x player handbooks, etc.

There are plenty of open options.