D&D 4E Monte Cook on licensing (and 4E in general?)

[Dedekind]

I don't think there's much else for me to contribute to this discussion. Thanks for reading my blog.

Monte, your blog is excellent reading. Thanks for taking the time.

I remember reading your discussion on how the OGL was good for the community...eventually. Do you think that will apply to the GSL? As in, eventually it will be good?

 

[Dedekind]

I won't speak for him, but only for myself and say that backwards compatibility is a big deal for me. I have lots of books I've barely used and want to keep using them. Going fully with 4e makes that more difficult (not impossible, but difficult and I don't have time for or interest in difficulty while preparing my games).

Certainly that is an issue. But also don't forget that though crunch will not translate, the soft stuff will. The FR source books will still be useful (with some exceptions) as will Eberron. For that matter, Ptolus and all it's detail will be useful even if the rules are different.

So, if we can agree that fluff translates but crunch doesn't translate, what is in these books that you want so much that is not in 4e already? That isn't meant to be snarky; I really want to know what from non-core 3E rules you want in 4e that will not be delivered. If your game is already 4E-like because of these extra rules, is there not a benefit to converting to a system where the "options come standard"?

 

[HeinorNY]

Oh, and I think 4E is going to be very successful, regardless of any open license or not. 3E would have been successful without the OGL. But I do think it helped.

This is all I needed to hear. Thanks Monte.

I hope all the OGL, sky-falling, doomsaying nonsense can wither now.

 

[kenmarable]

Certainly that is an issue. But also don't forget that though crunch will not translate, the soft stuff will. The FR source books will still be useful (with some exceptions) as will Eberron. For that matter, Ptolus and all it's detail will be useful even if the rules are different.

So, if we can agree that fluff translates but crunch doesn't translate, what is in these books that you want so much that is not in 4e already? That isn't meant to be snarky; I really want to know what from non-core 3E rules you want in 4e that will not be delivered. If your game is already 4E-like because of these extra rules, is there not a benefit to converting to a system where the "options come standard"?

Actually, the very top of the list is adventures. I love published adventures because I don't have as much time as I would like to prep my own. And I have a lot of great adventures that I want to use (currently running Expedition to Ravenloft, and hoping to start Curse of the Crimson Throne by summer, plus stacks of GameMastery Modules, Demonweb Pits, Eyes of the Lich Queen, heck, I'm still hoping to run Savage Tide someday). All of these *could* be converted to 4e, but like I said, I don't have the prep time I'd like, so I don't want to take the time to convert. That's the biggest reason.

Secondly would be the alternate classes. I'm notorious for playing odd characters. At least 1/3 of all my PCs have been psionic but there won't be 4e psionic rules for at least a year (or two if they can't fit it in with primal and the extra arcane and divine). There's always faking it with a wizard, but why fake it when I can still use the 3.5 psionic rules and the extra material Dreamscarred is publishing? Also Tome of Magic is probably my favorite 3.x book out there. Although Incarnum and Book of 9 Swords were a few notches lower, they are the kinds of books I like. The ones that play with the rules and experiment with new systems. So it's not just the fluff, but I really like the crunch of those books. One of the things that is turning me off from 4e is the fact that all the classes basically resource manage the same. After the incredible variety from late 3.5, having them all function the same with just different power choices just doesn't seem as interesting to me. I won't deny it's an order of magnitude more balanced, but that hasn't been as much of an issue for me. Classes that resource manage different can feel different to play.

Don't worry, you didn't come off snarky to me, and I hope I'm not sounding snarky either. I have no doubt that 4e is a great game and massively more balanced. Just when looking at the two side by side (well, to be fair, the 4e previews and my shelves of 3.5), 3.5 just looks like more fun to me. But there's plenty from 4e I like and does appear to be great fixes like the monster and NPC creation rules. Although that's more of a philosophy and set rules so far and can be retrofitted to 3.5 if you don't mind a "goblin shaman" being a 5HD humanoid with a handful of random spell-like abilities. I do plan on using that mindset for monster and NPC creation rather than the NPCs following PC creation rules mindset of 3.5.

However, I'll also fess up that as a part time freelance writer, I'll certainly take the time to learn 4e and try writing for it (in fact, I've paid money into Open Design hoping I could have seen the rules months ago, but ah well). However, for this discussion I'm primarily talking about my home games rather than playtesting writing and such.

On top of it, the group I game with the most took a couple of years to finally move from 3.0 to 3.5, so none of them are really interested in getting new books any time soon. So it might be kinda moot what my opinion is anyway. In fact, several of them who only buy the PHB or at most the core set are outright pissed that PHB 1 and MM 1 won't have all of the standard stuff and certainly don't want to shell out money every year for another core set. I think that's pretty cheap for a game they can spend so much time playing, but that's their opinion. WotC doesn't get much money from them anyway, but WotC might lose some of my money (and I've been a self-described WotC whore) because they pissed off the rest of my group. *shrug*

Sorry for the long-windedness, but you asked. For all those various reasons above, I'm not real interested in converting to 4e any day soon, even if it is a better designed, faster playing game. But I was on the fence (or at least figuring I'd convert after PHB 2 or something) until I started to see more info from D&DXP as well as talked to the rest of my group about it to get their feelings. As a freelancer, I'll probably get the core set and try it out or at least try DDI for a while to stay on top of 4e (especially if they ever release a decent GSL or go back to the OGL), but I might not eagerly crave WotC's latest releases quite like I did before. Or, who knows, there may be some magic in 4e that hasn't been previewed that lets me do the sorts of stuff that I want. *shrug* All I know is that my main group has made up its mind to keep playing 3.5 for at least another 2-3 years (we're about to start another very long campaign they definitely don't want to switch to 4e now for reasons above).

 

[Xorn]

Oh man! I thought I was the only one, too! I parked in the third space in my parking lot last night. Normally I park in the fourth, but I got home before my fiance so I took her spot. She parked in the fourth spot, and when I came out this morning, my car was covered with bird sh_t. I don't mean a ballop of dung on the windscreen, I mean there wasn't a square foot that didn't have bird crap on it. My fiance's car in the 4th spot didn't have even a little poop on it. Incidentally, there was no bird crap on any car but mine.

I'm not making this up--the car in the second space was too close to my space, so I was in turn too far over in my space... not half-way into the fourth spot, but if you numbered the spaces I was past the center mark for three. I should also mention that I like driving my fiances car more than mine. Her car is clean, zippy, and rides smooth. My car functions fine, but needs a lot of maintenance, and the heat only works on the two highest settings--so it's really, really hard to find a balance that isn't too cold or too hot. There's a ticking from the engine that I just tuned out a long time ago, but anytime I drive her car I notice it real badly when I drive mine again.

Interpretations... I feel like my car is 3.5--it gets me where I want to go, but it's not very fun to be driving. Her car is like 4E--I'm not stressing out when I drive it, and it's an automatic (my car is a manual). Plus the parking spaces--I was past 3, but not quite to 4 yet. Now this could also be explained because it's April, and I parked under the only tree in the lot when the birds are returning to the warming weather. Granted, there used to be lots of trees, and they cut them down because everyone had birdsh_t on their cars every morning--but they didn't cut down this tree... because everyone liked the tree, even though it meant birdsh_t on your car. It was still the best tree around the lot.

Creepy, right?

Are we at the stage where we predict whether 4E will die in flames or cure cancer? Ah, cool, I like this part.

My omen: I saw FOUR pigeons fly over my car this morning as I was smoking a cigarette and getting ready for work. Only ONE pooped on it, as far as I can tell. I think that the four pigeons must represent 4th edition and the one poop bomb must represent the big mistake I see WotC as having made so far.

I just can't figure out what the Hell my car represents. If I can figure that out, I'll know more. I mean, did 4E take a crap on me, the consumer? Or is my car the COMPETITION? Did it take a crap on the competition? Or maybe my car represents MMORPGs and we're looking at some online players returning to the fold. I'm just not sure at this point.

If someone knows, though, please let me know because I really, really want to know who 4E pooped on so I can decide if I should be offended.

 

[Voadam]

....1. I still don't think that the GSL stuff is a fiasco or is going to harm WotC much, or at all.

Regardless of whether 4e is a success or not, WotC's handling of the GSL/OGL has been poor.

First they said it would be open. Then they said publishers who pay would have stuff by January to begin making support stuff and others wouldn't get to do anything for months later so smaller publishers (like many pdf ones) won't be able to do 4e stuff at launch. Then they said on reconsideration they were not going with the OGL but a more restricted GSL with hinted content and even type of support product restrictions. They announced 4e will not be as open as 3e was. They announced there will be no srd online where you can look up the rules, just a DDI thing for copies of books bought. Then the dates WotC said stuff would be available for these publishers to begin their work were missed and months go by with the only statement being they are "revetting their open gaming policy" and they are frustrated it has not been resolved yet.

The longer they delay the less likely the big 3rd party publishers will be able to justify paying for the early opt in meaning fewer quality 4e support things published to start. Those who were more committed to doing 4e stuff and on hold until details are finalized are still in a position of economic uncertainty and I expect are facing opportunity costs due to the delays. Goodman is a full time publisher and stated they were strongly planning on going with 4e from the beginning and stopped making 3e stuff with a few statless ones to bridge the expected gap. That gap will now be longer and I expect them to be hurt by this.

Others (Paizo) have already decided that the delays have made early opt in not the choice for them and they have committed to ongoing 3.5 instead of 4e support during 4e's launch.

I don't expect there to be many 4e modules available at launch, the WotC one, internet fan ones based on pre-release preview info, and possibly Necromancer getting out a conversion of the Necromancer's Amulet on their website.

In addition all these 3.5 internet publishers can keep putting out new 3.5 stuff supporting those who stick with 3.5 instead of supporting those who transition to 4e.

Overall the handling of all this has not been positive for WotC. They have created some bad buzz, had to go back on plans they openly made with licensees because of internal issues within their own control, and not done right by the licensees they wanted to work with.

The licensing issues are issues entirely within their own control and could have been internally decided before openly engaging in licensing discussions.

Whatever WotC hoped to gain from open licensing and the GSL it has not been helped by their delays in figuring out how they want to handle licensing.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One last point on "easier, faster" etc.

Which system of measurement do you use- "Metric" or "English?"

The answer probably depends upon where you live, not upon which is easier.

The metric system is better in every way that matters. Its logical and simple, easy to learn & intuitive once you get the basics...and yet millions of people (myself included) still use the old English system as their primary if not exclusive system of measurement.

I hope all the OGL, sky-falling, doomsaying nonsense can wither now.

I think you're confusing "doomsaying" with examining a very real possibility.

I agree with Monte that it is most likely that 4Ed will be the big dog in the RPG market.

However, their mishandling of the GSL may make its introduction and success harder than it had to be, and may result in its losing overall market share to other RPGs. IOW, it may not be as profitable as Hasbro wants it to be.

If it isn't, thats a problem- if 4Ed doesn't meet Hasbro's required ROI, it could get axed despite being profitable. That kind of thing happens to profit making products & services every year in business.

 

[trancejeremy]

I think you're confusing "doomsaying" with examining a very real possibility.

I agree with Monte that it is most likely that 4Ed will be the big dog in the RPG market.

However, their mishandling of the GSL may make its introduction and success harder than it had to be, and may result in its losing overall market share to other RPGs. IOW, it may not be as profitable as Hasbro wants it to be.

If it isn't, thats a problem- if 4Ed doesn't meet Hasbro's required ROI, it could get axed despite being profitable. That kind of thing happens to profit making products & services every year in business.

I don't think whatever they do with the GSL will hurt the core D&D market. Heck, they could buy the rights to Spawn of Fashan and publish that as 4e and it would still sell millions.

But what the OGL does, or did, was expand the user base to people who wouldn't ordinarily buy D&D.

Of course, just how much is that worth to WOTC? I'm probably an extreme example, but I have over 200 d20/OGL books and only probably a dozen WOTC 3.x books. They could see that as a plus for WOTC, since they sold me a dozen books I wouldn't have otherwise bought, or they could see that as 200 books not sold to me. The Ryan Dancy WOTC thought the former way, but I think the new Hasbro dominated WOTC thinks the latter way.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But what the OGL does, or did, was expand the user base to people who wouldn't ordinarily buy D&D.

Which is part of my point.

The OGL has given D20 gamers a lot of choices, some of which are stellar RPGs.

If 4Ed is as controversial as it seems, the lack of GSL products may make some- possibly significant numbers- think "Who needs 4Ed?" and stick with their 3.X or similar, older RPGs for longer than is good news for WotC's (read Hasbro's) bottom line.

Personally, I preordered my Core 3, more for reasons of economy than anything else. I'm sure many people have done/will do so. However, that just gets you the big initial sales, not the long term sales of a successful product.

If the game is good, as I fully expect it to be, it will sell...but a lack of the kinds of products- modules, collections of unusual critters, etc.- the OGL publishers put out in the early days of 3Ed may cause enough dissatisfaction and grumbles about "lack of support" that 4Ed might miss key sales targets.

The question then becomes is it a mere stumble or a fatal fall?

 

[Dedekind]

Actually, the very top of the list is adventures. ... Secondly would be the alternate classes. I'm notorious for playing odd characters. ... Sorry for the long-windedness, but you asked.

Very interesting. Of all the things I was expecting to hear, I never considered adventures. I am kinda in the same boat. I don't have the time to develop stuff on my own which is why I've been running the Shackled City Adventure Path from Paizo. For me to run anything in 4E, I would need either another campaign-long adventure series or get another job! However, to play 4E, I am stoked and so are my friends. But I think this does mean I won't ever do a Ptolus campaign