D&D 5E Hope for an open GSL?

[harpy]

Add other perks to DDI that people want to pay for. Online character storage in the cloud accessible from a multitude of devices. There are any number of things they could do to steer people towards DDI with enhanced perks while releasing OGL.

I agree.

Paizo releases the vast bulk of their material as open content under the OGL. The only stuff that isn't open content is the fluff. They are doing great and they don't even have a DI web app.

One of the successes from Pathfinder is that it's easy to get into the game. There are at least a dozen people I've personally hooked onto Pathfinder because access to the rules was free. Eventually all of these people bought the core book and many went on to buy heaps of material, despite the fact that it's all free.

WotC could likewise just release all of their rule material as open content. What they need to do though is recognize that if they want to become a $50 million a year product then they need to transform themselves into more of a software product than a traditional print product. The end goal is to make a DI product that people will flock to because it's where everything is at in D&D.

One component in that would be to make it easy for 3pp to contribute within the DI ecosystem. Just like Apple has iTunes, WotC makes a digital environment where other people can prosper and once they are invested within it the market keeps shifting until it sustains itself under it's own gravity. Just like having an iPad or iPhone with all of those apps, a D&D DI would be the package that WotC owns where almost everyone goes to because that's where all the action is.

In defense, they have all of the rules as open content, and people can use them outside of the DI and do what they like with them, but WotC, with it's deep pockets, has already created an ecosystem that sucks everything towards it. While competitors have the material, they don't have the capital to really compete with what DI offers, but since that is a behind the scenes issue that fans aren't really paying attention to, it won't stir up bad PR. Fans get it however they want, either free or with all the trimmings, and adore WotC because they are being so "open."

In that kind of digital ecosystem, it could even draw in other established brands. They end up dominating the market and soaking up lots of money in a variety of ways because they have created an ecosystem that bearhugs anything that gets close to it.

In order to get to $50 million a year they would need around 400,000 subscribers at around $10 a month, or adjust those numbers down in various ways depending on how much revenue they can get from other sources, such as micropayments, books, license fees, etc.

Are they going to do this? I doubt it, but that's how it could be done.

 

[Henry]

Presumably the same way they were able to sell Core Rulebooks in the 3E era despite the Hypertext SRD and PCGen being out there.

...and the same way Hero Labs is making pretty decent money off of the Official Pathfinder Character Generator, despite it costing 50 bucks or so to get the core books for it. I ponied up, because at the time there was no (and still is no) decent FREE Pathfinder Character Generator out there, because "free" usually means "volunteer" -- and the number of people willing to put the real time in to make things like Ultimate Magic, Ultimate Combat, the adventure paths, etc. actually available to these generators is just not there.

If you're dedicated enough, you can volunteer for PCGen, learn their .lst structures, and put all that content in, talk to developers or code yourself when there's a new mechanic that needs to be implemented, etc. --

OR

you can go shell out 30 bucks for hero lab, and 30 bucks for APG, UM, and UC, and POOF! done. I'm not the only one who's done it -- last I heard, they were doing pretty well for themselves (not "million dollar company" well, but making a small profit.)

Just because it's OGL, doesn't mean free beats it every time. Most of the "free" stuff is just because of the reference documents -- freebies someone had to sit down and actually put lots of man-hours into are relatively uncommon.

 

[El Mahdi]

It would be nice if they opened the 4e GSL so that someone can support 4e when WotC stops.

That would be cool. Of course though, someone could always make an OGL version, much like what's been done with OSRIC and such...although I realize that's not quite the same thing.

They've said though, that they intend to continue 4E DDI support (though they haven't said for how long). I'd hope that support would remain indefinitely, and eventually add the same support for all older editions, but I don't know if that's realisitcally in the cards.

 

[grimslade]

OGL or GSLNext

I do not see OGL returning. Hasbro will not be convinced to develop rules for their competition.
To the suits, OGL is the only reason there is a Paizo or Green Ronin. The fact that these smaller and more dedicated companies responded to market desires does not enter into their thinking.
I like the OGL. It created a marketplace of ideas and pushed out a lot of content for a very popular game system. I do not think the OGL is why 3E was so successful. It helped support it but a good economy and a nostalgic feeling at the millennium pushed sales though the roof. The OGL made sure there was plenty of product to meet the demand. A lot of the early OGL stuff was horrid. No editing, poor rules implementation, bizarre power levels and just plain weird stuff. The cream rose to the top and we got a few great 3pp out of it, but they discovered that the real money was in having the whole system. Paizo entered at the end of 3E after the hose job WotC pulled yanking back Dragon and Dungeon into DDI. (Yes, the contract expired, but the non-renewal was to eliminate a potential competitor, oops.) They learned from the mistakes of the primordial OGL market and saw an opening with WotC making a clean break with 3rd for 4th. They also provided some of the best fluff/story money could buy. Goblins. Those frikken goblins will make love Golarion forever.
Sorry meandered a bit there, but the gist is there will not be another OGL, but there will be looser or loosening of the GSL to support 5E not supplant it. It remains to be seen if there will be sufficient publishers who want to fluff up D&D. I do not see Paizo entering the 5E space unless it truly unites a lot of the fan base. Paizo is nimble enough to jump in if PF takes a hit. The biggest learning curve for WotC/Hasbro has to be listen to what your fans want and provide it. Breaking things (Forgotten Realms, Bayou Halflings), to break with the past really annoys people. And good story beats a lot of mathematical magic.

 

[El Mahdi]

I think a license for 5E (or whatever it ends up being called) needs to be a little more open also. But I don't think it's necessary for it to be as open as the OGL was.

The OGL did exactly what it was supposed to initially, business wise. And it did exactly what it was supposed to do as far as making an iteration of D&D freely available forever. But long term, I don't think it was good for business at all. I think a little less open than the OGL, but more open than the GSL, would hit the sweet spot as far as utility.

But from a purely business perspective, if WotC really wants 3pp's involved, the parts that absolutely need to be eliminated are the poison pill clauses of the GSL. The parts that require destruction of warehoused material, ceasing of publication, etc. Those proved to be non-starters for the majority of 3pp's with the GSL.

 

[Hussar]

Presumably the same way they were able to sell Core Rulebooks in the 3E era despite the Hypertext SRD and PCGen being out there.

Well, considering how 3e and 3.5 respectively only lasted three or four years, I wonder how much of a chilling effect the Hypertext SRD had? 3.0 had no competition, but 3.5 certainly did.

So, basically, the sense that I'm getting is that if WOTC wants to keep the DDI, they won't be able to use things like the Character Generator or the Rules Compedium as major draws.

Like I said earlier, an Open GL 5e would have to sell a whopping great heap of PHB's and keep selling that whopping great heap if it wants to compete with what the DDI has managed to do.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Like I said earlier, an Open GL 5e would have to sell a whopping great heap of PHB's and keep selling that whopping great heap if it wants to compete with what the DDI has managed to do.

The couple things I can think of that might keep DDI solvent while allowing the game to be opened up (to maybe not as broad option as the OGL, but certainly more open than the GSL) would be:

- The Game License allows for publishers to make written material using 5E but not electronic programs. (Whether or not a license like this is possible, legal, or would be agreed to by publishers is a different story. I have no idea.)

- WotC is able to get all-new and fully programmed Character Builder, Monster Builder, Encounter Builder, Trap Builder, Map Builder, and Virtual Tabletop that also accepts 3PP material (that customers can buy and add to their programs like apps) released on day and date of the 5E books. (Thereby being many miles ahead of any other company or volunteer who wants to try and get into the game with their own electronic programs.)

- WotC finally reprints their old game material from the earlier editions in PDF form, but only makes them available for download (or probably more to the case, readable onscreen) through their website by people with a DDI subscription. And all this material is not under by the GL but *is* able to be put into WotC's own builders if they so choose.

How many of these are feasible, I don't know. But they are some things that people might be willing to shell out a subscription fee for to get access to.

 

[Knightfall]

The couple things I can think of that might keep DDI solvent while allowing the game to be opened up (to maybe not as broad option as the OGL, but certainly more open than the GSL) would be:

- The Game License allows for publishers to make written material using 5E but not electronic programs. (Whether or not a license like this is possible, legal, or would be agreed to by publishers is a different story. I have no idea.)

- WotC is able to get all-new and fully programmed Character Builder, Monster Builder, Encounter Builder, Trap Builder, Map Builder, and Virtual Tabletop that also accepts 3PP material (that customers can buy and add to their programs like apps) released on day and date of the 5E books. (Thereby being many miles ahead of any other company or volunteer who wants to try and get into the game with their own electronic programs.)

- WotC finally reprints their old game material from the earlier editions in PDF form, but only makes them available for download (or probably more to the case, readable onscreen) through their website by people with a DDI subscription. And all this material is not under by the GL but *is* able to be put into WotC's own builders if they so choose.

How many of these are feasible, I don't know. But they are some things that people might be willing to shell out a subscription fee for to get access to.

I know I would subscribe.

 

[Jawsh]

Well, considering how 3e and 3.5 respectively only lasted three or four years, I wonder how much of a chilling effect the Hypertext SRD had? 3.0 had no competition, but 3.5 certainly did.

Zero. The Hypertext SRD had zero chilling effect. If it convinced one player not to buy the Player's Handbook, it convinced ten players to buy some WotC product.

The Hypertext SRD was in no way competition for D&D. The same way pirated PDFs were in no way competition for D&D. A few ignorant high-level managers think that piracy and online access kill the game, but they're wrong; they've always been wrong.

 

[Henry]

Thing is, I could live with a "more open" GSL versus using the OGL again, if they hired Clark Peterson or someone with his legal knowledge and passion for the game to give definitive guidance on the license, because in as example in him you had someone in business for themselves, who understood companies' desire to control its own IP, but also willing to make the concessions that make it attractive to 3rd parties to want to do something under license. However, as much as Scott Rouse and Clark Peterson pushed, there was no budging above Scott, and personally I still get the vibe that both Linae Foster and Scott himself lost their jobs over the issue. Don't know if that's true, of course, just the impression I got from the time tables involved and statements made on message boards.

That said, despite people telling me I'm wrong, I REALLY don't think a new edition will succeed without using either the OGL or a license open enough to entice both professional third parties as well as amateur users to use it. Why? Because to me the success of 3E wasn't in the brand, it was in the fact that there was no ONE way to play D&D. There was the Unearthed Arcana way. There was the Grim Tales Way. There was the Thieves' World way, the Black Company way, the True Sorcery way, the OSRIC way, the Swords and Wizardry way, and every fly by night blogger who had a new skill system in his campaign that "fixed" the problems he saw in 3E.

We are a culture of tinkerers. We like to "make it better, our way" and share it. the GSL restricted this from happening dramatically. Under the GSL you can't:

-reprint any existing mechanics
-redefine already-defined game terms
-redefine existing monsters
-redesign the way core systems work (like healing surges)

Could you do this on your own web site without the GSL? Sure -- as long as you run the risk of being C&D'd or sued because you're little fish. Everyone who isn't WotC doesn't want to take that chance, even hint at it, especially not in this litigious day and age.

Under a safe harbor, you can "fix" D&D for your home games to your heart's content and share it with your e-neighbors. Without this part of the culture (that's been there since the late 1970's mind you, hello Alarums & Excursions!) the game's network doesn't embrace it as much.

No, we didn't have an OGL for 1E or 2E, but I'd argue we had the same cultural landscape under the OGL we had under 1E, and less so under 2E. Early-90's TSR's financial failures were legion, but one major contributor I assert was the attitude TSR took on "derivative works" in the early 90s -- their earned nicknames of "T$R" and "They Sue Regularly" needed to be combatted in order for WotC to get the community behind D&D again. The OGL was one of several strategies Dancey used to restore the community's interest.

That's my take on the "harm" the OGL has done, even though I don't have much more proof than a shaky cause-and-effect premise.