Kenzer D&D logo

[ColonelHardisson]

I actually thought that was part of a legal settlement due to some unlicensed use of their comcs in Dragon magazine. It's what I'd heard at any rate. Anyone else know if this is true or possible?

I'd heard something similar. That could be why Kenzer could afford the license.

 

[EricNoah]

I had also heard something similar; I'm not sure if this was a WotC deal or a TSR (pre-WotC) deal, though.

 

[Gargoyle]

Is there any particular reason why other companies don't do the same?

$$$. The upfront costs for publishing a book are big. You have to pay for art, freelance writers, printing, marketing, etc all way before you make a penny. Adding to those up front costs before you even make a sale is hard to do, and is risky if you don't know if you'll recover any of the added extra expense. It seems like most publishers simply don't see it as worth the cash (or they don't have the cash, like me ). Kenzer may be the smart ones here, if they're doing well with Kalamar. Perhaps other publishers would do better if they spent the money.

But it's hard to predict "I'll get X more sales by spending Y amount of cash so that I can put the D&D logo on this product, and therefore I'll make more money". Kenzer might be the only company with sales data that can be used to scientifically determine if it's worth it. And even then, their data can't be complete, because they didn't try to sell Kalamar without the D&D logo in the same market, so it still requires an educated guess under the best of circumstances.

The other reason might be WOTC's willingness to sell the use of the logo. They're not going to want you to use it if you are competing with them directly (selling books similar to the books they are publishing, the Arms and Equipment Guide comes to mind) , and may not want to sell to companies who publish products that they consider substandard in quality. For example, if you consistantly publish products that have horrible art or poor bindings, they probably won't want their trademark on it. So some publishers may have approached them and were turned down.

My guess is that for certain types of product series like a big campaign book with sourcebooks, like Kalamar, it would be worth it. I don't think it would be wise to purchase a license just for one book. You could probably get a better deal by purchasing it for multiple books. All IMO of course.

 

[johnsemlak]

They're not going to want you to use it if you are competing with them directly (selling books similar to the books they are publishing, the Arms and Equipment Guide comes to mind) ,

Wouldn't the Kalamar Setting be considered compettive to WotC's settings (FR, WoG, and later Dragonlance)?

 

[Mark]

I had also heard something similar; I'm not sure if this was a WotC deal or a TSR (pre-WotC) deal, though.

When did the "Dragon Archive" (or whatever it was called) come out and who owned the D&D licensing rights at that point? Because I am guessing it wasn't the use of the comics in the magazine but rather not having the right to re-use the comics that forced the deal onto the table. *shrug*

 

[Gargoyle]

Wouldn't the Kalamar Setting be considered compettive to WotC's settings (FR, WoG, and later Dragonlance)?

That's why the license is expensive.

But I was really referring to directly competing products. For example, at one time Kenzer was coming out with an Arms and Equipment Guide for Kalamar. It doesn't seem to be on their website or release schedule now, and that's probably because WOTC released their Arms and Equipment Guide last month. I don't know the details of those particular products though.

Releasing products that are so similar at the same time is detrimental to both companies, so publishers try to avoid it by paying attention to each other's release schedules and even contact each other to coordinate their schedules so that they don't release similar products at the same time.

When there is a license agreement between two publishers, then you can bet there is more coordination than normal, and that the owner of the license, (in this case WOTC) has more power in negotiating these things.

 

[Gargoyle]

Oh, and Kalamar might be competitve to FR and other campaign settings, but I'm sure WOTC sees it as increasing the sales of Player's Handbooks and other core books.

WOTC's overall strategy with supporting the d20 license, and Kenzer's D&D logo is that they'll sell more core rules by allowing others to publish material that requires the core rulebooks. They've always made more money by selling core rulebooks than by selling campaign settings or adventures, so why not let other publishers do the work of creating "support products" to sell the core rules?

 

[thundershot]

The HUGE downside to this is that they can't produce non D&D d20 supplements. This is what caused to Kenzer Arms & Equipment Guide to be delayed or even cancelled. They simply can't put it out, at least not yet. If it was a matter of material crossing over between the two A&EG's, Kenzer should just remove the material from their book that's reprinted in WotC's, and go hog wild from there with their own stuff. I've still got a candle lit in the hopes that it'll come out...


Chris

 

[Darklone]

Another thing that has to be taken into account: Kenzer made the deal before the OGL.

And yes, every Kenzer product goes through Wizards RnD. Though there have been some RnD guys around who said that's not true...

About the products: Yes, it looks like Kenzer sells better due to the D&D logo.

 

[dcas]

When did the "Dragon Archive" (or whatever it was called) come out and who owned the D&D licensing rights at that point? Because I am guessing it wasn't the use of the comics in the magazine but rather not having the right to re-use the comics that forced the deal onto the table. *shrug*

This is also what I had heard. However, I do remember David Kenzer saying on the Kenzer boards that their D&D license "effectively" started when they first produced Kingdoms of Kalamar (I'm thinking of the older boxed set, not the newer hardcovers and suppliments). Perhaps he simply meant that the T$R of that era couldn't afford to attempt legal action against Kenzer & Co. and just said, "Go ahead. Do what you want."

The only thing of which I am certain is that it is the Knights of the Dinner Table property that has allowed Kenzer to license the D&D name. Whether it is because KODT was reprinted without permission on the Dragon Magazine Archive CD or because the success of KODT brought in the $$$ to acquire the D&D license is the only question that remains in my mind.

Another interesting tidbit is that David Kenzer also stated that it was Gargoyles (a late module T$R produced for Greyhawk) that was the inspiration for him to produce Kalamar. Apparently the module was so awful that he was convinced he (and the other people who developed the product -- Steve Johansson and Brian Jelke) could do much better.