D&D 5E Hope for an open GSL?

[Mark CMG]

Actually, if you go back to his original comment on this, he's saying that:

(a) 3e had OGL.
(b) 4e didn't have OGL.
(c) 3e succeeded where 4e didn't, and
(d) that was because of OGL.

That's just not supportable.

Seems hard to dispute that Paizo, most notably with the Pathfinder property, is the biggest single competitor to WotC D&D property. By Paizo's own statements, they found the GSL to be onerous to their continued support of where WotC was heading with D&D in 2007. Since Paizo opted to go with continued support of the OGL property that was so successful for them and WotC previous to WotC moving away from the OGL, it seems also hard to dispute that WotC not succeeding to the level of success they wished for 4E was perhaps the largest factor leading to the current state of D&D. Do you feel there was a factor more key to that result?

 

[Kingreaper]

Do you want to step back from this illogical statement, or are you willing to say that 4e would outsell Pathfinder if they left the system the same but added OGL?

It's far, far too late for that now.

Releasing 4e under the GSL rather than OGL drove away a lot of the third party support; for obvious reasons.

Changing the license now? It's too late, the damage is done.

 

[Gryph]

The thing is: The evidence says that they can't afford a 6th edition. 6th edition isn't something they're planning on, because if 5th fails, they're dead.

As such, the "Pathfinder Possibility" of an OGL is irrelevant.

Either they succeed, in which case nothing like pathfinder exists because 5th ed doesn't end.
Or they fail, in which case they don't care what other people do with the SRD, because they're out of the market entirely.

If 5th edition succeeds there will absolutely be a 6th edition (or 5.5 or 5 Ultimate).

I would be planning for success if I were WoTC. Planning for success with an OGL for 5e means opening the possibility for a Pathfinder 5 somewhere down the road when the inevitable 6e is launched.

 

[MatthewJHanson]

4e is also basically competing with its predecessor under the guise of Pathfinder, which is basically D&D 3.75 (only with much higher product quality than most of what WOTC churned out for 3.0 or 3.5).

It was almost like WOTC drove fans to Paizo. The OGL issues, while real, are pretty minor, IMHO.

I find it odd that you say that the GSL had no effect, but Pathfinder did. WOTC could have easily stopped Pathfinder (the game) from happening, and a 4e OGL (plus lost of prerelease communication) is one way they could have done it. Keeping the magazine licenses with Paizo would have been another.

 

[Kingreaper]

If 5th edition succeeds there will absolutely be a 6th edition (or 5.5 or 5 Ultimate).

Or a continually changing and increasing set of modules, with which ones are core being updated.

It works for MTG, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they decided that, given as MTG is making great profits, they really should learn from its business model.

 

[herrozerro]

A quick comparison on the above - 3.X has OGL, sells very well.
4e has GSL, sales poor enough that WotC began talking internally about 5e in 2010....

So, yes, the OGL does make a difference.

The Auld Grump

Correlation does not imply causation. as others have said 4e's "poor" sales might have been to WotC releasing 3e under a liscense where it can always compete with any future WotC product. I imagince 5 will have the same issue unless it falls back into the trap of creating an OGL and setting up a theoretic 6e for fail again.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I've mentioned it before, but in my opinion, if WoTC fails to utilize a fully open OGL, fails to allow publishers pre-emptive access to it, and fails to allow them access to the DDI for insuring their material is included, they are not going to be as successful as they could have.

Pathfinder has a massive variety of support and its not stopping. Just recently a new OGL Pathfinder book called Lorefinder has come out. This adapts some of the Gumshoe rules for Pathfinder. This expands the game in manners in which Pathfinder itself couldn't really hope to acehive mechanically even though people could use a lot of the role playing elements and information found within it. If 5e doesn't have something like this to compare than it can't really compete long term.

People are enjoying playing Pathfinder. They are getting more options all the time. From various parties.

WoTC can't necessarily compete with them now. How are they going to do so if they continue doing what they've already done that hasn't worked?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I've mentioned it before, but in my opinion, if WoTC fails to utilize a fully open OGL, fails to allow publishers pre-emptive access to it, and fails to allow them access to the DDI for insuring their material is included, they are not going to be as successful as they could have.

Pathfinder has a massive variety of support and its not stopping. Just recently a new OGL Pathfinder book called Lorefinder has come out. This adapts some of the Gumshoe rules for Pathfinder. This expands the game in manners in which Pathfinder itself couldn't really hope to acehive mechanically even though people could use a lot of the role playing elements and information found within it. If 5e doesn't have something like this to compare than it can't really compete long term.

People are enjoying playing Pathfinder. They are getting more options all the time. From various parties.

WoTC can't necessarily compete with them now. How are they going to do so if they continue doing what they've already done that hasn't worked?

Lorefinder?... I need to look that up, thanks!

The Auld Grump

 

[Gryph]

Or a continually changing and increasing set of modules, with which ones are core being updated.

It works for MTG, I wouldn't be at all surprised if they decided that, given as MTG is making great profits, they really should learn from its business model.

Isn't every third set of MTG a core set that replaces the previous core set?

I believe that is the business model here with a lower frequency of core replacement.

5e will release, a bunch of expansion modules will release, then 6e will release with about an 80 - 90% rule overlap with the rest coming from previous expansions.

From an IP protection viewpoint, that seems a poor business model to run under an OGL.

I admit to some bias here, I felt that there was more garbage than quality released by the TPPs. A more generous GSL license that retained some QA review by WoTC on the efforts of TPPs would, I believe, lead to a healthier third party market place.

The problem for Wizards, as I see it, is that third party support in settings and adventures adds real value to brand, so long as the quality level of the products is good. On the other hand, poor quality releases and alternate rulesets have a negative impact on the brand. That's why I would prefer non-revocable GSL, but one that required review by the D&D team of all product published under it.

 

[Jawsh]

So, just to note, you think that the main factor in the success or failure of 4e D&D was the OGL vs the GSL?

Do you think that 5th edition could be avoided by simply taking 4e, dragon boobs and all, and putting that under OGL? Would that action allow WotC to recapture market share from Pathfinder?

I feel like responding to this. I happen to think: Yes, for the most part, taking 4e and slapping an OGL on it would make it work better. That's the best thing WotC could do right now. It wouldn't immediately kill Paizo or immediately regain D&D's market share, but I am sure that in the long run it would put D&D on top again.

If so, then why aren't all those smart folks at WotC using that solution?

They're not that smart. And even smart people can get stuck in a way of thinking that's just wrong. And even if there are some people within WotC who might have wanted to do that, there are stupid voices with higher paygrades drowning them out.

It's also necessary to note that we now have a history with 4e. The damage has already been done. The cause of the damage was the lack of OGL. But what got damaged was the players' perception of the rules. Ask Pathfinder players what they like better about Pathfinder, and they'll tell you some mechanical crunchy thing.

The gaming license (OGL, GSL) is the Armor Class. The rules system (4e, 3e, PF) is the Hit Points.



And anyways, either way there's going to be a new edition. Even if 4e was a huge hit, there still would have been another edition eventually. The only difference 4e's popularity would have made is that more mechanical decisions within the rules would be based on stuff from 4e.