Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6190525" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't understand how this has any bearing on comparative sales of 4e and PF. 4e could be outselling PF 10:1 (which is probably the rate at which it outsells a whole bunch of indie fantasy RPGs) yet WotC still not be happy with its performance.Huh? As long as the DDI continues, 4e is fully supported!It seems to me that there are at least two aspects to this.First, is Paizo operating in a market in which it is vulnerable to a competitor going head-to-head agaist it using its OGL-licensed material? My gut feeling is that the answer to that question is No - WotC, in particular, has never shown any tendency to take this approach (despite the fears of many publishers in the early days of the OGL that WotC would do just this). Whereas WotC clearly does face such a competitor, namely, Paizo.Second, all material that is derivative of Open Game Content is itself Open Game Content, and hence licensed for use under the OGL. The default setting for Paizo material is that it is derivative of the 3.5 SRD (though there are further complexities here, because PF uses 3.5 SRD but last time I looked at its OGL s 15 declaration it ony referred to the 3.0 SRD). In ight of the first factor, how much is it worth Paizo's time and money to work out which new material is derivative, and hence already OGC, and which is genuinely new?</blockquote>