Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 8439405" data-attributes="member: 907">The OGL had several purposes. The obvious one was that Wizards had taken a look at what actually sells, and determined that it's basically PHBs. At one point I think Ryan Dancey described the rest of the product line (particularly adventures) as marketing for the PHB that hopefully pays for itself. So the idea was that if you could get other companies to make the support material, WOTC could focus on the more profitable stuff.A second one was as an olive branch of sorts to fans and other publishers. By creating the OGL and d20 STL, WOTC provided a safe haven for third-party publishers and fans to publish their own stuff, so you wouldn't get the same situation as with Arduin and Mayfair.A third was what Ryan Dancey called network externalities. Essentially the theory was that the value of a game is not in the quality of the game itself, but in your ability to find people to play with. So by making it easy for publishers to release their stuff as support for D&amp;D instead of as standalone games, the idea was you'd keep people looking for something new still playing D&amp;D or at least something closely related.And finally, the fourth was insurance against D&amp;D dying. Should WOTC have fallen to the same fate as TSR, there was no risk that D&amp;D would be caught up in a legal battle between creditors. The OGL made sure that someone else could pick up the pieces and keep publishing a form of it. And when WOTC themselves published a version of D&amp;D that was a bit too radical of a departure for many customers, that's what allowed Paizo to publish Pathfinder as a D&amp;D clone.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Staffan, post: 8439405, member: 907"] The OGL had several purposes. The obvious one was that Wizards had taken a look at what actually sells, and determined that it's basically PHBs. At one point I think Ryan Dancey described the rest of the product line (particularly adventures) as marketing for the PHB that hopefully pays for itself. So the idea was that if you could get other companies to make the support material, WOTC could focus on the more profitable stuff. A second one was as an olive branch of sorts to fans and other publishers. By creating the OGL and d20 STL, WOTC provided a safe haven for third-party publishers and fans to publish their own stuff, so you wouldn't get the same situation as with Arduin and Mayfair. A third was what Ryan Dancey called network externalities. Essentially the theory was that the value of a game is not in the quality of the game itself, but in your ability to find people to play with. So by making it easy for publishers to release their stuff as support for D&D instead of as standalone games, the idea was you'd keep people looking for something new still playing D&D or at least something closely related. And finally, the fourth was insurance against D&D dying. Should WOTC have fallen to the same fate as TSR, there was no risk that D&D would be caught up in a legal battle between creditors. The OGL made sure that someone else could pick up the pieces and keep publishing a form of it. And when WOTC themselves published a version of D&D that was a bit too radical of a departure for many customers, that's what allowed Paizo to publish Pathfinder as a D&D clone. [/QUOTE]

Verification