• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Hope for an open GSL?

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
Actually, I'd go one further. Not only should 5e be OGL-compliant, but WotC should provide a mechanism whereby 3PP publishers can integrate their material into any 5e-DDI tools.

And this right here is what would be the way for WotC to make their money off of the 3PP people... charge an 'app fee' to people to incorporate the 3PP content they've purchased into DDI.

You buy a 3PP product and you register it at the company's website. You receive a code you can then input into DDI (assuming of course you are a current subscriber), and pay a one-time 'app fee' of like .99 or more (depending on the size of the file, and whose just gets added to your monthly WotC DDI subscription fee). This then unlocks all the crunch of that product in DDI. This includes any Character Builder material, any new monsters you could then customize, any new traps, and even perhaps all the maps (if it was an adventure) that you could print out and use.

The 3PP gets its money from the purchase of the book/campaign/adventure... and WotC gets its money from the purchase of the app.

Now granted... someone could buy the 3PP and not buy the app (or even be a part of DDI for that matter)... but I suspect if folks could get their 3PP materials integrated into all the DDI tools... that would be something players would actually be more willing to pay for.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

IronWolf

blank
Now granted... someone could buy the 3PP and not buy the app (or even be a part of DDI for that matter)... but I suspect if folks could get their 3PP materials integrated into all the DDI tools... that would be something players would actually be more willing to pay for.

There will still be a segment that rebel against the idea of subscription based tools.
 

Cergorach

The Laughing One
There will still be a segment that rebel against the idea of subscription based tools.

Which doesn't surprise me, because WotC will probably retire the current DDI 4E tools the moment 5E is launched, thus all your 4E tools go *poof*. There's a very good reason why MMOs are moving to F2P, there are a lot of folks interested in a property and willing to invest money into it, but just not through a subscription service.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
There will still be a segment that rebel against the idea of subscription based tools.

Well, there's a segment that rebel against anything. So the point isn't to get 100% compliance with the new game... it's to more people to play and spend money on the game than are doing now, while at the same time actually making money. And like it or not... enough people buy into the subscription model that they will most likely be sticking with it. And *if* 3PP products can get added into the tools (for a small fee of course), then you're going to get even more people signing up for DDI than are now.

Start throwing in stuff from the Basic, 1, 2 & 3E eras into DDI because they can work with the new iteration of the game... and then you're going to get even more subscriptions. And those of you who absolutely refuse to "rent" your games (as many folks derisively call it) will have to be happy with just using the physical books, or not playing the game.
 

IronWolf

blank
Well, there's a segment that rebel against anything.

Quite true!

DEFCON 1 said:
Start throwing in stuff from the Basic, 1, 2 & 3E eras into DDI because they can work with the new iteration of the game... and then you're going to get even more subscriptions. And those of you who absolutely refuse to "rent" your games (as many folks derisively call it) will have to be happy with just using the physical books, or not playing the game.

Oh, I am sure they can get more subscriptions, it is a question of can they can get enough to warrant sticking with the model or if they switched models could they generate even *more* income.

I also think that many of the people who clamor for Basic, 1, 2, and 3.x content will not be happy with it being released only via DDI where their access disappears after a subscription is canceled. I think they want PDFs specifically.
 

Jawsh

First Post
The one reason why I don't think we'll see an OGL as open as the 3rd edition one is that I don't think WotC would want a game that allows a 3PP to create a game like Mutants & Masterminds out of it-- a game that was based upon the rules and trappings of D&D so you got a bunch of people to buy into trying it out... but was different enough from it that you didn't have any reason to buy the D&D Player's Handbook to play it.

So this ended up being a genuine case of WotC creating a market and a marketing campaign for Green Ronin that didn't actually net them any money. Green Ronin created a 'D&D superhero game' that you didn't need D&D to run.

Any OGL or GSL in the future will keep that kind of thing shut off. And if they can't shut that kind of thing off... then I don't think they'll have another OGL/GSL.

Bleh. I think it's been said before, but I'll say it again. Mutants and Masterminds is still good for D&D. This is the point Ryan Dancey keeps making. Games like Mutants and Masterminds don't actually compete directly with D&D. For D&D players, M&M is a pleasant diversion and an example of the diversity possible within the d20 system. They're already branching out, so they're likely the kind of players who will try all kinds of stuff, from western gaming to Call of Cthulhu to variations on modern gaming, and in the end, D&D remains the biggest fish, so they always come back to it. They always stay interested in what D&D is doing, because that's the core of the hobby.

Meanwhile, M&M brings in a whole new type of gamer, because it's a superhero title, comics fans who aren't already D&D fans, are likely to pick it up. Now, maybe that's the extent of most of their forays into RPGs, but some of them will be intrigued and move on to the core of the hobby, into D&D. That means new long-term customers for WotC, and they didn't have to take any of the risk of publishing a superhero RPG. If anything, M&M is a free marketing campaign for WotC by Green Ronin, not the other way around.

But what if M&M makes tons of money? It's true that WotC will be missing out on that cash, but they wouldn't have got any of it anyways, since they never planned to make a Superheroes RPG. But WotC technically owns the core of d20, so after M&M proves lucrative, it's very easy for them to make a competing superhero game, if that's what WotC decides they want to do. Green Ronin took the risk of pioneering the market, and now WotC can capitalize on it, if it turns out to be lucrative.

I don't know what the current WotC management is thinking right now, but if they have the kind of mindset that seeks to shut down M&M, they're only hurting themselves.

That being said... there actually is one final way (as was touched on above) that I think WotC might be willing to open things up-- by charging fees to the 3PPs and/or customers to include OGL content in the DDI tools. If they could charge players like an extra .25 a month to their DDI subscription to "unlock" 3PP customized character generation content in the new Character Builder (or likewise charge fees to include new 3PP monsters into the Monster Builder) maybe that would inspire them to open up the OGL. Because at least then they get some money out of the people who don't want to buy the WotC products and buy the 3PP products instead.

I'll never say never on that, but I don't think it's the right way to go. Not because I think the price point is off, but because I think it's a barrier to convenience. My problem with microtransactions is that there is an inherent cost in convenience in requiring players to sign up with credit card info. Kids are a big part of D&D's market, and credit cards are still something that not all of them have.
 

Jawsh

First Post
Start throwing in stuff from the Basic, 1, 2 & 3E eras into DDI because they can work with the new iteration of the game... and then you're going to get even more subscriptions. And those of you who absolutely refuse to "rent" your games (as many folks derisively call it) will have to be happy with just using the physical books, or not playing the game.

I have subscribed to DDI, and then my subscription ran out without me ever having got to really play with it. On the other hand, I've bought books and PDFs that I still have access to, and I can play with them any time I want.

Plus, DDI forces updates. Right now anyways, I simply cannot get support for playing 3.5 edition games from DDI.

But if I really want the material that badly, there is always an alternative. Not saying that I'd condone piracy, but in this day and age, it's a cinch to get any of the actual material. Less easy to get pirated working software, granted, but that can probably be done too.
 

DEFCON 1

Legend
Supporter
I'll never say never on that, but I don't think it's the right way to go. Not because I think the price point is off, but because I think it's a barrier to convenience. My problem with microtransactions is that there is an inherent cost in convenience in requiring players to sign up with credit card info. Kids are a big part of D&D's market, and credit cards are still something that not all of them have.

DDI already requires credit card info. All this is doing is making 3PP "pay rent" if they want their material to appear in DDI's suite of tools. If the 3PP doesn't care, then they wouldn't have to pay. Or if the player doesn't care if his 3PP stuff is in the tools, then they wouldn't have to pay. But I think that if a player has a bunch of D&D add-ons from 3PP and can get them to work within the Character Builder and Monster Builder, many of them will pay for that convenience. And thus WotC actually makes real money off of letting other companies use their stuff, as opposed to just hoping that people buy their rulebooks while simultaneously using 3PP material.
 

TheFindus

First Post
If WotC want to unify the community, then nothing short of the OGL will do.....

If 5e is not open, then all the 3PP who have their own systems will continue to develop their own systems. The ones who don't, who serve to support other systems, will support Pathfinder, not D&D......

Actually, I'd go one further. Not only should 5e be OGL-compliant, but WotC should provide a mechanism whereby 3PP publishers can integrate their material into any 5e-DDI tools. Doing this will redirect a huge swath of the Pathfinder support instead towards D&D. It may well convince some 3PPs to drop their own systems in favour of supporting D&D. And pretty soon, Paizo and Pathfinder would start to look awfully isolated... That's probably their best bet to kill off Pathfinder, which is probably a necessary step if they want reunification.
I think you are right about all of this.
But what the 3e OGL shows is that it becomes much much harder to publish a new edition in a couple of years without enabling the competition to keep producing stuff under the OGL liscence.
So what WotC wants is the unifying factor of the OGL, which lets 3rd party publishers produce stuff for the new edition, so WotC sells more "core" books. At the same time they want more legal room to disallow the use of the rules once a new edition is designed.
But I think this can be pulled off with a new sort of GSL and in a friendly way, too. I think that this is something we are likely to see.
 

Dausuul

Legend
Which doesn't surprise me, because WotC will probably retire the current DDI 4E tools the moment 5E is launched, thus all your 4E tools go *poof*. There's a very good reason why MMOs are moving to F2P, there are a lot of folks interested in a property and willing to invest money into it, but just not through a subscription service.

Mearls specifically stated this would not happen. 4E will continue to be available in DDI past the launch of 5E. It remains to be seen how long this will be the case.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top