Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Samothdm" data-source="post: 1494857" data-attributes="member: 5473">Okay, I just have a few things to say.  I think we're all getting to the point where everyone has (somewhat) clearly stated their position and obviously I believe we are all going to, as Setanta puts it, agree to disagree.Point #1) I have never disagreed that using/posting OGC is legal, fair, etc.  My only point is that I do see a big difference between:a) Using the OGC from Company A's new assassin class to include an assassin character in my work (even perhaps reprinting all of the class statistics, etc.), and b) Transcribing one entire book and posting 100% of that book's OGC for free online within a few weeks/months after that book came out for sale. See my post on it <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1492994&postcount=196" target="_blank">here</a> which did not seem to really generate any comments.Yes, I realize that legally, according to the OGL, there is no difference.  I know I don't have a legal leg to stand on.  But, to me, it just seems a little off.  I'm not making a moral judgment against people who do this.  I'm just trying to understand what the point of doing it is.  It seems to me that the people it benefits the most are people who now would have access to something for free that they probably should have paid for.  As I've said, if Bendris wants to use Insanity rules in his campaign, and post them on his website because he's using them and wants his players to know what those rules are, and he doesn't expect them to buy the whole book just for those rules, then that seems fair.  However, if he's going to say, "We're using all of the variant rules from UA" then I think he should politely ask his players to buy the book, or maybe at least one they can share, rather than just posting the whole thing for free on his site.And, no, I'm not picking on Bendris.  He seems to be very level-headed.  It's just the first name that came to mine since he's been very vocal on this thread.2) I've seen several posts here about how it doesn't matter if WotC makes 4E closed or not, because the OGL can't be revoked and the current version of the d20 rules (3.5) will continue forward, with or without WotC.I really do see this as short-sited.  Let's think for a minute about D&D prior to 3.0E.  How many of you were playing before then?  I mean really playing regularly, not just "keeping up on the rules" by buying a new Player's Handbook?WotC comes out with 3.0E, does a big marketing push, and brings a lot of new players into the game.  My entire game group that I DM, with maybe one or two exceptions, are all newbies who had never touched an RPG prior to 3rd Edition.  They were exposed to the marketing messages that WotC did and came into the game.  They don't know from "D20", "D&D", "OGL" or "SRD".  They play, in their minds, "D&D".  I imagine that a lot of other groups have a similar situation.When WotC makes a new 4th Edition, they will do some sort of marketing campaign to try to capture new, first-time players to the game, as well as trying to convert current players to the new edition.  If 4E is closed, then brand new players to the game will probably never be exposed to the concept of an "OGL" and will not be putting their dollars into that community of products.  Additionally, there will be some current players of 3.5E who will convert to 4.0 and then have to decide if they will continue supporting 3.5E publishers and then spend the time to convert those materials to their new 4E games.  This means that, over a relatively short amount of time, the consumer base for 3.5E will dwindle to the point that I think it would be very difficult to support the current product output being made by 3rd party publishers.  Yes, the OGL will not "go away" if 4E is closed.  Yes, 3rd party publishers can continue to produce product geared to the OGL 3.5E.  But, will there be a big enough consumer base to support them?  Will they have the marketing clout to get better distribution outside of LGS's, which are relatively few and far between?  When was the last time you saw a non-WotC or non-White Wolf RPG in your local Border's or Wal-Mart?  That's a rhetorical question so no need to site your individual one-off examples.  The point is, over 90% of 3rd party publishers are not carried in those types of outlets.Will 3rd party publishers be able to work together to come up with some sort of broad marketing campaign to bring new blood into "their" version of the game?  I'm not sure they would.  I don't imagine most of these companies have a lot of extra dollars around to market their stuff outside of the community of already-existing players.  And, since there will be no more "official" guidelines, how does that help your average consumer who decides to stick with 3.5E? We've already seen people doing things like getting rid of HP for VP/WP and getting rid of AC in favor of their own system.  While I like those kinds of ideas, I think that after a while, individual companies would try to stake a claim by making these types of variants their "norm", making the choices that much more limited for someone who wants to play a "traditional" 3.5E game and doesn't want to spend a lot of time converting material.Just some (rather long) thoughts.</blockquote>

Verification