I disagree. Paizo is feasting on the legacy of the glorious OGL. If 4e was OGL there would not be such an optimum legacy for them to secure for themselves.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
How about a deadline to WotC?
- Thread starter Aberzanzorax
- Start date
I disagree. Paizo is feasting on the legacy of the glorious OGL. If 4e was OGL there would not be such an optimum legacy for them to secure for themselves.
It seems that for our hobby the actual rules system has more marketing power than a trademark regarding the leading name.
I was just trying to interpret ideas.
Effectively the sense I am getting is that it takes D&D out of the open gaming movement and enters it into a closed license movement with the GSL. 4th edition pretty much is the only thing ackowledged as D&D by WotC and they are distancing themselves from 3rd and the OGL, and the GSL specifically wants to prevent people from using the OGL so that it can be killed off.
Paizo and a few others just decided not to take the cyanide in the bait trap that the GSL is in that regard.
Fifth Element
Legend
For me personally? Heck no. Was gamerdom as a whole considered when it was introduced? Probably, given Peter Adkinson's comments. Did it benefit WotC? Probably. No real way for anyone to actually know that, but probably.
Fifth Element
Legend
No, that was the d20 STL. The OGL does not allow use of a WotC-IP logo. The STL did, and the GSL does.
It certainly did benefit D&D's strategic value rise for that time.
See post above. It seems the logo within the hobby was not more efficient than the rules system to market with.
Fifth Element
Legend
What does this mean? When has WotC said anything like "3E is not D&D?". They're not messageboard geeks, they don't say things like that. They even refer to "all editions of D&D" (or something like that) on their most recent dungeon tiles product, which implies they know there are other editions of D&D.
The OGL cannot be killed off. It's a license in perpetuity.
The GSL wants nothing. The people who designed the GSL may want something in particular, we have no way of knowing. You can pretend to know, but you really don't.
ShadowDenizen
Explorer
IMHO, I think it's more the reasoning and philosophy behind the rules than the rules themselves that have created a schism amongst the playerbase.
WRT a deadline? WotC had a deadline for the GSL (much like the DI, but that's another topic); the launch of 4E. And it came and went, until, several weeks later, when they brought forth a document that was wildly decried by people who actually wanted to support the current edition of D+D.
Given that we haven't heard much about the GSL since then, and Scott seems to be the only one working on it, I'm going to make the wild hypothesis that a revised GSL isn't a top priority for WotC as a whole.
(As an aside, however, I do commend the Rouse for his hard work & dedication; this seems to be his baby, and it can't be easy being understaffed on manpower, and under the scrutiny of fans 24/7.)
Fifth Element
Legend
There's nothing "certain" about the OGL's benefit to WotC. It's all theory, without any way to know whether the perceived benefits ever materialized. You just can't tell if more PHBs were sold because of the PHB, or if fewer were sold because of the cut & paste SRD. There's no way to know if WotC benefitted on the whole from the OGL.
I have no idea what "D&D's strategic value rise for that time" means.
So what? If people do not use it as they used to it is pretty much dead in respect to what it used to be.
Similar Threads
