How do you feel about WOTC, the 3PP and the intent of the GSL

[Najo]

I like to add a couple of general comments.

Although technically WOTC is not obligated to do a OGL or GSL for 4e, there is a key element harmed by them not having on. That is trust and respect for the 3pp.

WOTC has spoken about there wanting to involve them, and that they were going to provide a liscense allowing 3pp to publish for D&D4e. They have spoken about the benefits this has for D&D and the industry (3pp making products WOTC won't, driving sales to D&D player handbooks, and removing the market division that multiple systems create).

With all these things considered, WOTC not keeping in mind the interests of both their own company and the 3pp shows that WOTC is not interested in making these "friends" feel safe. The GSL should feel inviting to use if you respect the confines of its requriements. Currently it says to the "partners" that WOTC doesn't trust them, respect them and can take anything from them when ever they want. It also shuts down the OGL. It sends a message to the 3pp that they are not businesses working with WOTC but underneath WOTC with the threat of termination at any time. That is more like tyranny than a business relationship.

As for not having options for what version of D&D or D&D clone your going to play on the poll, there is no need. If you are playing 3.5 or pathfinder, the end result is your not buying D&D from WOTC. Its the same difference as far as the poll is concerned.

 

[Najo]

One a third note, I still like to hear from someone at WOTC about the intent of the GSL and the goals they are working towards with the 3pp. Something to give us an idea would be nice. I know they don't want to say anything official or give any timelines (although considering how long they have known about the need for this, and the Oct. sell date coming) it is very unprofessional that the GSL issues are not cleared up yet.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

One a third note, I still like to hear from someone at WOTC about the intent of the GSL and the goals they are working towards with the 3pp.

And I'd like the Dallas Cowboys cheerleader squad to feed me tiramisu off their naked bodies.

 

[Cadfan]

It isn't very classy to attribute the response to this poll to lying , by the way.

*shrug*

I stand by my claim that a lot of the people who selected "stop playing" were in the "stop playing" category long before any GSL news came out.

 

[Angel Tarragon]

I must say that I am seriously dismayed at how tight the GSL is.

I am borderline right now. I'd like to get my hands on a handful of 4E books, but I also don't want to support a company I fell in love with over the OGL, now that they're trying to do their best to pretend like it never happened.

 

[Stormtower]

I think they're wrong, I'm disappointed, but I'll still be playing D&D (both 3.5 and 4E) for a long time to come.

I will admit that I am hedging my bets with 4E. It's a fun game with some excellent new mechanics, but it hasn't set my world on fire. I love the RPGA and have found a whole new world of fun with organized play, so that's really the only horse I have in the 4E race.

IMO the industry at large is only helped by Open Gaming, and the GSL is a step backwards. I'd like to see 3PPs have an opportunity to capitalize on 4E without totally destroying the 3.X market (Paizo aside with Pathfinder).

 

[Treebore]

Why would anyone quit playing D&D entirely over this?

When I voted I would quit playing D&D I meant quit playing WOTC's D&D. I'll always play my D&D. Whether that be via old editions, PAthfinder, C&C, whatever.

I have too many fine options for playing D&D to keep giving my money to a company I don't believe in.

 

[Treebore]

Personally, it's not a big deal. I don't really plan on buying 4E splats from WotC or anyone else. Be nice if WotC and 3PPs could find a happy medium, but it's not something to stop playing the game over.

Again, the weight of a poll like this here doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme. Even though we just sepnt 2 years playing Age of Worms, if I mentioned the name Paizo to any of my players, their reaction would be either, "What's that?" or "Bless you." Not to mention any of the lesser known 3PPs....

Well, ENWorld does have well over 2,000 visitors. If all of them play D&D, and a 1,000 of them voted, they would make for a very valid poll.

This poll is almost a third of the way to being valid. At least as valid as those polls used by news channels anyways. They have used polls with as few as 700 responders before, and claimed an error of +/- 3%. Plus they call "registered voters", which for us works because we are "registered D&D players".

 

[Najo]

You can't ignore that 70% of the poll takers are dissapointed with WOTC. Even give or take a certain percentage of votes to account for any flukes, it still is a sick amount of us percentage wise.

I love 4e, and I was really enthusiastic about the GSL, at first I thought Paizo was jumping the gun with Pathfinder. But then as each 3pp felt they couldn't work with the liscense, and then with Clark coming out and saying the liscense won't work for Necromancer, that was the final nail in the coffin for me. It made me realize how sleezy the whole GSL thing is treating the 3pp, which is not the intentions WOTC implied it was going to be.

That is the shame, that WOTC needs to either redo the liscense and make it work fairly for a 3pp or they are being dishonest to us and the 3pp.

 

[Orcus]

First Paizo, now Clark and Necromancer Games. Neither is doing the GSL. This is a shame as both companies brought alot to the D&D game and I don't think they made a negative impact on WOTC's bottomline. The 3pp sell a 10th to a 50th of WOTC sells in volumn, and most of the purchasers of the 3.x 3pp still spend a considerable amount of money with WOTC.

I love 4e. I understand the reasons for most the system and GSL changes and agree with them, except the lack of 3pp safe harbor with GSL and the retro active clause towards the OGL.

The reason the GSL is so restrictive is either a) WOTC is trying to protect their brand from abuse by amature 3PP or b) WOTC is trying to wipe out the OGL and regain a RPG monopoly with the D&D brand.

WOTC, I think a happy medium needs to be met. The 3pp are essentially glorified DMs who want to produce high quality materials to share on a larger scale. I think this is a natural element for D&D of any edition to have. You need to look at company's like Microsoft with the Xbox 360 and treat your game engine like you would a video game system. Give publishers safety to publish and support your product instead of trying to figure out ways to compete with it. The issue with the OGL was that it was to open, but the GSL is not open enough.

Any rate, this thread is intended for two things.

1) Scott and Linae, I know you do not want to comment on timelines or legalities of the GSL, but what I like to know is what is the intention of the GSL? Does WOTC want 3pp playing the the D&D sandbox or not? Please at least let us know what the goal is.

2) To the fans, how do you feel about the effect of the GSL on the 3pp and the current facturing occuring in the 3pp community? Vote in the poll and place your comments in the thread.

I often get blasted for being too much of an optimist. But I firmly believe that the license will be changed and that Wizards wants to see the GSL be a success.

Clark