Gygax's views on OGL

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Gary has stated before, on these forums even, that he has enjoyed playing 3E occasionally, but that he would never DM it. <snip> Troll Lords has contracted him to write new material for Castles and Crusades this year, but only because it's similar enough to AD&D that he doesn't need to do a lot of conversion. They're putting money behind the idea that Gary's name is a big draw enough to make a profit. Time will tell, but I think they're right.

It's enough to get me back into d20 most likely. Not just EGG's name, but a d20 lite system that may make DM'ing the system fun for me again. EGG signing off on it only helps make the decision easier. I share his views on 3e, fun to play and a chore to DM.

 

[Ourph]

So, I guess it's a taste issue. WotC doesn't impress me (as it obviously does you) with inventiveness in particular, but also with their writing quality, their mechanically soundness or their presentation and art.

Whoa!!! That's a big conclusion to leap to. The fact is, the WotC offerings (IMO) range from barely even with the D20/OGL cream of the crop to....well, let's just say "significantly less appealing".

I guess my point is, if WotC WANTED to produce excellent quality gaming materials, they could afford to do so (especially if the OGL/D20 system weren't present). I'm not maintaining that they DO produce excellent quality gaming materials.

BTW - I agree on Mutants&Masterminds, a very quality book in terms of writing, mechanics and presentation. The actual physical characteristics of the book (binding, paper quality, etc.) isn't top notch, but it's at least above average. If I were interested in Supers gaming I probably would have purchased it.

 

[trollwad]

Sorry to reply to something now several days old, but....
WotC is at least ten times bigger than Necromancer, Goodman Games, or probably even White Wolf. Not in terms of sales (I don't know what the multiplier is in a sales comparison between WotC and WW, but I'm guessing it's at least x2), but in terms of employees and other costs.
When I was laid off from WotC in 2002, WotC had about three hundred employees. Three hundred. That includes everyone on the sales staff, the marketing staff, human resources, the mailroom, etc. They took up seven floors of an eight-floor office building. By comparison, I doubt White Wolf has more than 100 people. Most other game companies have less than ten people. Hell, Pazio Publishing produces 2+ magazines per month (at least one of which has a monthly circulation of over 20,000 copies, 5-10 times or more what your average d20 publisher sells) and they only have about 20 employees.
Now do you see how a 32-page adventure, which makes maybe $1-$2 profit (based just on the cost of goods, printing, and the salaries of the designer, editor, artist, mapper, and typesetter directly involved in the book, but not counting the averaged-out costs of the marketing, sales, human resources, etc. employees) might be profitable for the ten-man housed-in-the-basement company (which has a low overhead) but not profitable for WotC (which has a high overhead)?

It is interesting to hear this from Sean Reynolds who obviously knows more about the inside of wotc than me. If you read my earlier posts, my point was simply that WOTC could CHANGE their overhead structure to be leaner and more focused on modules, etc -- i.e. go from 300 employees to 100 or something. Might this mitigate some of the need for reissuing the core rules mildly tweaked every four years? I made the the analogy to marvel entertainment in the early to mid 90s, I hope that it does not come true.

 

[trollwad]

The problem, however, is that he only games with the material he personally wrote over 20 years ago. That's sorta like a TV marketing exec watching 100 hours of "Howdy Doody" and saying he's in touch with children's programing. That -defines- being out of touch, and it's precisely what is going on.

numerous articles on enworld and other easily readable sources indicate that mssr. gygax has an extremely eclectic types of gaming going on. hes mentioned that he was interested in trying the cthulu game, he is active in LJ, he published the Hermit, hes working with Troll Lords on several crossover things, hes conversant with upcoming Castles & Crusades, hes mentioned that he played in one of his son's Gaxmoor 3e games, etc etc.

basically, I dont mind if people disagree with, or even slam an elder statesman like gygax, I just want to correct all of the disinformation that seems to be growing up about him.

 

[Incenjucar]

In regards to WotC's setup, I think they really just need some more effective organization. The constantly changing view on alignments and undead is proof enough at this point. There needs to be a 'unified theory' in 3e's philosophy. The organization required for that unification would, hopefully, include in-house editors, rather than the seemingly-inept freelancers they've been using (Not all inept, but enough of them...)

 

[viscounteric]

Unfortunately, your point isn't really relevant. When the bean-counters look at the profitability of each part of the business, they look at how much money each part is making, not how much money each part is making per employee employed in that division. They just say (and note those numbers are just examples and not at all accurate) "RPGs are making $10M a year profit, cards are making $70M a year profit."
The head of each division is trying to make their numbers look as good as possible so when the layoffs come around they can say "We're X profitable, we shouldn't have to lay off anyone."
No division is going to say, "Sure, we bring in ten times the revenue of this other department, so we should factor into our profit ten times the overhead costs of that other department." Or "We have twice as many employees as this other department, so we'll include twice our share of the floorspace/rent portion of the overhead." It just doesn't happen ... nobody volunteers to make their own numbers look lower.

That's why companies apply these costs evenly. And that's why smaller, less-profitable products can be almost worthless to a larger company when they'd be deliciously tasty to a small company.

(I mean, if I wanted to stay at home and write adventures and publish them in PDF, I could probably make a decent living doing so. Writing it myself, getting a friend to edit it for a small cost, using clip art or 3D art I created or a small portfolio of stock illustrations from artists friends I know, typeset it myself, sell online. It would be a lot of work, but almost all of my costs -- other than the initial investment in the typesetting software, which I don't have) are costs I'd have anyway just for living in my apartment: computer, electricity, work space, etc. HR costs? None. Marketing/sales costs? None, I'm the marketing/sales guy. Mailroom employee costs? None, that's me again. Janitorial costs? None, I'm the janitor. And so on.)

Sorry sir, I won't settle for dodging the base question (# of employees directly related to RPG development). I will concede some of your points against the ideas I was trying to form. You can rip apart my faulty logic until the cows come home, but I'd like, in your estimation, how many are primarily working on RPG development.

Having done budgeting and analysis for work, our model was to compare the % difference between expenses and revenue. That "$10 million profit" makes the bean counter happier if it $25M revenue and only $15M expenseves versus $250M revenue and $240 expenses. A dip in sales would make a lot of nervous execs on all levels in the latter example.
(Of course all numbers are just examplesl )

Using layman's knowledge: Hasbro bough WOTC for one thing: Pokemon. Since that's gone, Magic is the emphasis of the parent company's bottom line regarding it's subsidiary. So long as the RPG line remains profitable at a certain level above it's variable expenses (printing costs), it should not be touched. Remember, there are fixed expenses from the Hasbro corporate that are proportionately being distributed throughout its branches ACCORDING to its share of the company's success. The Tuscaloosa Hillbilly Game division is not expected to take the lion's share of the expense if the home office's toilet paper stockpile goes up in flames than Playskool, Tonka, or Parker Bros.

Then again, what do I know. I left my job when the higher ups tried to slash fixed costs (which were rising due to inflation, etc.) They've met their budget numbers since then, but their variable costs increased by triple the ammount they saved on reducing fixed. Economics aren't a requirement to work in a management/executive position.

Of course, saying that, why would Hasbro to operate any differently? :\

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Emiricol, Maggan, I'm not saying that there aren't new games being produced that are non-OGL, nor am I asserting that designing a new system is the only way to be creative within the industry. Nor, for the record, am I bashing D20- its my 2nd favorite system.

If I may reformulate for clarity:

Any given game store has a limited amount of shelf space that must be divided between the various products.

I live in a major metropolitan area (Dallas/FW Metroplex, Texas, USA), and there are stores that only carry D20, GURPS, and perhaps one or 2 other systems, usually HERO or Palladium. Why? Because 1) those systems have a proven track record of sales, 2) brand recognition by even the newbies to the hobby, so they get asked for by name, and 3) no one wants to stock a game that doesn't sell.

Any other system is facing a HUGE uphill battle for survival. Those games are coming out, but they aren't being seen by most gamers.

In fact several games of note have virtually dissapeared in their original forms and are stocked only in a D20 or GURPS version- Traveller, Deadlands, the Trinity System, Silver Age Sentinels,and Call of Cthulhu are all damnably hard to find in original form. I haven't seen too many of the White Wolf Storyteller games on the shelves lately, either.

In addition, many games that have had excellent reviews are being edged out by the flood of OGL products- In Nomine and Godlike, 2 well recieved games, are virtually invisible.

I cannot agree that 30 years of gaming has exhausted the creative mine of possible systems. I have personally playtested some systems that have not made it to market that were pretty good (though more were bad than good) and unlike anything currently out there (that I know of). The designer of one such decent system felt that that there was no point in trying to get his product to press because he couldn't find a place to sell it.

Development of new systems matters because in the process of "reinventing the wheel," the game designer may come up with a more elegant or simply better way of doing things than has been done before- thus advancing the hobby by forcing other game designers to rethink their creations. If it wasn't for games like Talisantha, Runquest or Palladium, many of the changes in D&D in the past 15 years might not have happened. Remember the ads for Talisantha- "NO ELVES!" And while the concepts behind diceless or classless systems didn't make it into D&D, they still exerted a conceptual pressure on other designers- Are classes neccessary? Are dice?

I'm also seeing a different but related problem in my own groups. Because D20 is ubiquitous, people aren't playing anything that isn't D20. Whereas before OGL, if you wanted to play a sci-fi game you probably had to learn a new system, there have been at least 6 D20 sci-fi games released in the past couple of years. While this is definitely making it easier to get people to try new genres, it seems to be stunting their growth as gamers, and that mentality makes it that much harder for a non-D20 game to succeed.

Once again, I'm not bagging on D20. I'm just worried that its doing as much harm as good within the hobby.

 

[Maggan]

Shelf Space 2020

Emiricol, Maggan, I'm not saying that there aren't new games being produced that are non-OGL, nor am I asserting that designing a new system is the only way to be creative within the industry. Nor, for the record, am I bashing D20- its my 2nd favorite system.

That's cool, never felt you did.

If I may reformulate for clarity:

Any given game store has a limited amount of shelf space that must be divided between the various products

I live in a major metropolitan area (Dallas/FW Metroplex, Texas, USA), and there are stores that only carry D20, GURPS, and perhaps one or 2 other systems, usually HERO or Palladium. Why? Because 1) those systems have a proven track record of sales, 2) brand recognition by even the newbies to the hobby, so they get asked for by name, and 3) no one wants to stock a game that doesn't sell.

Yeah, the shelf wars have been won by WotC and WW (and in Sweden, by some local rpgs that outsell everything from abroad). I think this trend started a long time ago, even before the OGL, as a result of your points 1,2 and 3.

What I think is the future for small press publishers is to use the Internet and build their brand, and when they have proven that they make games that the shops can sell, they will get their chance. Many shops are burnt out on trying the latest and greatest rpg only to find that it's badly produced and not interesting for anyone. They are taking a risk, and if a new talent want them to bet on him, I'd suggest one year of Internet and pdf-production, and only after aquiring an established fan base trying to get the game into the shops.

Anecdotal observation:

Many gamers I know really don't grasp this. They feel that just because they have a game, the shops should stock it. The shops should give them their chance at the title match. They basically feel entitled to shelf space. When, as you say, the shops are run according to 1, 2, and 3 above.

So the million dollar question is: how to expose a new game? Well, if it aint on the shelves, something else has to be done. Maybe we can learn from the source, how did the first D&D reach such popularity, and how come it sold so well?

I cannot agree that 30 years of gaming has exhausted the creative mine of possible systems.

Neither can I. It's not exhausted by a long shot, that's sorta what I was trying to say. But it is more difficult to come up with new and revolutinary designs after 30 years, at least IMO and IME. And also it is more difficult to pit those new systems against the entrenched D&D, Vampire, GURPS and d6 and convince people that your (in a general meaning) design offers clear advantages over the competition.

Development of new systems matters because in the process of "reinventing the wheel," the game designer may come up with a more elegant or simply better way of doing things than has been done before- thus advancing the hobby by forcing other game designers to rethink their creations. If it wasn't for games like Talisantha, Runquest or Palladium, many of the changes in D&D in the past 15 years might not have happened. Remember the ads for Talisantha- "NO ELVES!" And while the concepts behind diceless or classless systems didn't make it into D&D, they still exerted a conceptual pressure on other designers- Are classes neccessary? Are dice?

Oh yes, development is important. I don't think I said otherwise. And I think that it's going on all around us, all the time. And that it is not hampered by the OGL. But then maybe that's because I live in Sweden, and here, the dominant game is not D&D. D&D sits at around 5th place here. So I see a lot of development in the BRP clone we have, and another system that is very popular. And I get to see the development of d20 and D&D on an international basis, and I get to see the Forge and all that stuff. For me, that's plenty of things going on.

I'm also seeing a different but related problem in my own groups. Because D20 is ubiquitous, people aren't playing anything that isn't D20.

Maybe because of the situation in Sweden, I've never had that problem, although I have read many posters on eg RPGnet that has the same experience. That won't make you any happier though. You have my sympathies.

Cheers!

Maggan

 

[d4]

Any given game store has a limited amount of shelf space that must be divided between the various products.

I live in a major metropolitan area (Dallas/FW Metroplex, Texas, USA), and there are stores that only carry D20, GURPS, and perhaps one or 2 other systems, usually HERO or Palladium. Why? Because 1) those systems have a proven track record of sales, 2) brand recognition by even the newbies to the hobby, so they get asked for by name, and 3) no one wants to stock a game that doesn't sell.

the change i've noticed is that whereas it used to be D&D, White Wolf, Palladium, and GURPS, it's now d20, White Wolf, Palladium, and GURPS. meaning there's a lot more small publishers getting space at the game stores than there used to be, due to OGL and d20. even if they're using the same ol' d20 system, i still see that as a good thing for the hobby. i don't really care about new systems, so much as new blood coming in through new publishers and designers. it doesn't particularly concern me that their creativity is being channeled into the d20 system as opposed to making up their own systems. i don't really see the advantage of making up a new system from whole cloth for every new game, as opposed to tweaking an existing one, anyways.

I haven't seen too many of the White Wolf Storyteller games on the shelves lately, either.

wow, really? White Wolf is still #2 behind d20 around here (new jersey), and was when i lived out in California too. (not to mention before that when i lived in upstate New York.)

In addition, many games that have had excellent reviews are being edged out by the flood of OGL products- In Nomine and Godlike, 2 well recieved games, are virtually invisible.

i was a huge In Nomine fan back in the day -- IN died before d20 ever existed. i wouldn't blame SJ's inability to keep the line afloat on d20 and OGL.

I cannot agree that 30 years of gaming has exhausted the creative mine of possible systems.

i'm going to be a bit pragmatic and probably controversial here. i'm not going to say d20 is the perfect end-all be-all gaming system. but, it's good enough. i don't particularly care to see new innovative systems because i'm content with the one i have. it may not be the Platonic Ideal of Gaming Systems, but it works, and i'm happy with it. to be completely honest, i'd rather see people spend their creative energy on fine-tuning existing systems, rather than creating new ones.

 

[Desdichado]

wow, really? White Wolf is still #2 behind d20 around here (new jersey), and was when i lived out in California too. (not to mention before that when i lived in upstate New York.)

Same in Michigan. And in Texas when I lived there.

i'm going to be a bit pragmatic and probably controversial here. i'm not going to say d20 is the perfect end-all be-all gaming system. but, it's good enough. i don't particularly care to see new innovative systems because i'm content with the one i have. it may not be the Platonic Ideal of Gaming Systems, but it works, and i'm happy with it. to be completely honest, i'd rather see people spend their creative energy on fine-tuning existing systems, rather than creating new ones.

Not nearly as controversial as that same statement would be on rpg.net! But I agree. I've made that same point a few times myself -- I'm fine with d20. To be perfectly honest with you, I'd still prefer a more granular approach to improvement than levelling, but I can either cobble together such as system, or impose rigid controls on when and how players level in my campaigns, so it doesn't bother me anymore. I'm sure the "level-less" d20 will come out soon enough, though -- in fact, isn't Blue Rose by Green Ronin supposed to do something like that?

The thing I like about d20 is that with so many options in print, I don't have to create much of anything from scratch to get radically different feels. True, I have to kitbash a bunch of stuff together, but that's a lot easier than creating it myself.