NEW D&D Player's Guide info!
- Thread starter Mark Plemmons
- Start date
Berandor
lunatic
Re: Re: Hmmm
Well, if you want to publish an adventure with the rules in, then perhaps it is a disadvantage (though you could always make your own feat/whatever to match the on in the book)... just as things published in the various WotC books are not OGC.
On the other hand, being official D&D means that you can be fairly sure to be able to use it in any D&D campaign, even on cons and such, where other d20 material might be restricted.
You also know that the product not only went through a review stage at Kenzer, but also at WotC, and four eyes see more than two, right?
You also know that WotC approved the content as official and balanced for play with all other official products, so you don't have to worry about that any more than with other WotC products.
Face it: the official status gives you security above the prdoucer's name alone.
And frankly, I can't see why no OGC is a disadvantage for 95% of the users (the non-publishing ones).
Berandor
Psion said:
Well, if you want to publish an adventure with the rules in, then perhaps it is a disadvantage (though you could always make your own feat/whatever to match the on in the book)... just as things published in the various WotC books are not OGC.
On the other hand, being official D&D means that you can be fairly sure to be able to use it in any D&D campaign, even on cons and such, where other d20 material might be restricted.
You also know that the product not only went through a review stage at Kenzer, but also at WotC, and four eyes see more than two, right?
You also know that WotC approved the content as official and balanced for play with all other official products, so you don't have to worry about that any more than with other WotC products.
Face it: the official status gives you security above the prdoucer's name alone.
And frankly, I can't see why no OGC is a disadvantage for 95% of the users (the non-publishing ones).
Berandor
Hard8Staff
First Post
Berandor is correct. Late April in stores.
Psion
Adventurer
Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
That's a non-concern for me. Chances are that if I was a con-goer anyways, I wouldn't plan on having control over who or what I play.
That said, how big a chunk of the D&D playing populace are con-goers? I don't have figures, but I am wagering the proportion is rather small.
1) Did it go through R&D?
2) Even if it did, unlike WotC, they aren't going to take pains to add it to the SRD, like they are slating other WotC stuff to do.
In short, AFAIAC, non-WotC non-open product is the WORST possible status you could have.
Are you serious?
You should consider the fact that those "other publishing ones" are a significant boon to the players out there. You aren't the only kid on the block, and pretending to be the best friend of the big kid on the block makes it so the rest of the kids on the block can't play with you. Take a book like Relics and Rituals. Its spells and other mechanics like true rituals are getting expanded on. Further, take a look at Seas of Blood. Its seaborne combat system is being used by another company. The firearms mechanics from deadlands are used in Dragonstar. And so on. The open content out there will prosper, grow, and cross germinate. In short, it will be supported, and people who buy Mongoose's and S&SS's material can expect to see that familiar material used elsewhere. The best rules concepts will prosper. If they are open.
Now take some of the better concepts from the players guide. Like scaling spells. A cool concept. But one that is not open. No one else can expand on it or use it. But if people like the idea enough, someone will make a comparable mechanic that is OPEN. If it is well written and accepted, other people will pick it up and use it. And people who have the Kalamar player's guide will eventually ditch your system so that they can take advantage of the more widely supported one that is out there.
Having a quality product is a bona fide benefit... as AFAICT, that is all that the WotC eyes are looking for when they looking at them.
But being official is meaningless in and of itself. Sure, it might be nice to have it as a stamp of quality. But companies will earn reputations of their own and have their own stamp of quality.
It's up to you to decide what is best for your business. But from a consumer standpoint, and from the standpoint of your contribution to the community, I think Kenzer's policy is a bust.
Berandor said:
That's a non-concern for me. Chances are that if I was a con-goer anyways, I wouldn't plan on having control over who or what I play.
That said, how big a chunk of the D&D playing populace are con-goers? I don't have figures, but I am wagering the proportion is rather small.
1) Did it go through R&D?
2) Even if it did, unlike WotC, they aren't going to take pains to add it to the SRD, like they are slating other WotC stuff to do.
In short, AFAIAC, non-WotC non-open product is the WORST possible status you could have.
Are you serious?
You should consider the fact that those "other publishing ones" are a significant boon to the players out there. You aren't the only kid on the block, and pretending to be the best friend of the big kid on the block makes it so the rest of the kids on the block can't play with you. Take a book like Relics and Rituals. Its spells and other mechanics like true rituals are getting expanded on. Further, take a look at Seas of Blood. Its seaborne combat system is being used by another company. The firearms mechanics from deadlands are used in Dragonstar. And so on. The open content out there will prosper, grow, and cross germinate. In short, it will be supported, and people who buy Mongoose's and S&SS's material can expect to see that familiar material used elsewhere. The best rules concepts will prosper. If they are open.
Now take some of the better concepts from the players guide. Like scaling spells. A cool concept. But one that is not open. No one else can expand on it or use it. But if people like the idea enough, someone will make a comparable mechanic that is OPEN. If it is well written and accepted, other people will pick it up and use it. And people who have the Kalamar player's guide will eventually ditch your system so that they can take advantage of the more widely supported one that is out there.
Having a quality product is a bona fide benefit... as AFAICT, that is all that the WotC eyes are looking for when they looking at them.
But being official is meaningless in and of itself. Sure, it might be nice to have it as a stamp of quality. But companies will earn reputations of their own and have their own stamp of quality.
It's up to you to decide what is best for your business. But from a consumer standpoint, and from the standpoint of your contribution to the community, I think Kenzer's policy is a bust.
Berandor
lunatic
Hard8Staff said:
Of course I am
Psion:
Just to get it out at the beginning: I am no Kenzer&Co-Employee. It is not MY product, or scheme, though I have playtested the Player's Guide.
I am merely a gamer.
And I agree with you that good products will make their name for themselves, as Kenzer has done so far and will continue to do so in the future. I think the time will come, in the near future, when people will see the KenzerCo logo and buy stuff becuase of their name.
As it stands, Kenzer's involvement in the d20 system is as new as that of any other company out there. And even though I have been impressed by other companies' work, there is no company out there that I would buy an interesting product of without reading a review of it first (preferably, more than one) and then examining it closely myself.
I think this barrier is much smaller with official D&D products. I also think there are some, or a lot, groups out there with DMs who are not really into the d20 movement, and tend to disregard anything non-WotC, or at least scrutinize non-WotC stuff VERY closely while almost blindly allowing official products to be used.
So if a player sees a good feat or PrCl in a d20 book, chances are they won't be allowed by said DM, because this stuff "wasn't properly tested".
And it's kind of understandable, because with the flood of d20 publishers, you can't be informed on all companies, much less if you're not really into d20.
But with content from Kalamar, chances are the DM would allow it because "it's official".
I personally know three DMs who are that way.
My "con argument" was only a minor part in this above argument, because at cons I would think it to be similar.
I don't go to Cons, myself - but that is no reason for those who go not to have some benefit from Official D&D.
Still, who tells you that Kenzer&Co won't include OGC into their work? Isn't that allowed with D&D? I really don't know, as I'm no publisher, and no lawyer.
Berandor
Noah Kolman
First Post
Hey everyone,
Psion, you make some interesting points. I'll see what I can do to address your comments, but of course, the final decisions and opinions are up to you.
1) All of our Kalamar products are supposed to go through WoTC's R&D department (for rules) and their art department (for art). I can only assume that they do this. I don't know what you mean by the SRD, so I can't comment on that.
2) I understand your comments about open game content and the d20 community, but I have to say I don't share the same fears about our products. I think we have shown a commitment to our Kingdoms of Kalamar line by producing a large number of supplements already, and we have no intention of slowing down. This means that the ideas in the player's guide will not remain stagnant. It is true that other companies can not adopt or expand on our rules, but WoTCs products are not open content either, and I don't think that has hampered the growth of their ideas. I think the main difference in your view and mine is that you view the fact that our products are not made by WoTC as a bigger deal than I do. If you think that means less quality or less support or less "officialness", then that is your opinion. I disagree, but I would rather have our products speak for me. I would encourage you to check out the player's guide and let me know what you think.
If anyone has concerns or questions about any of our products, I am happy to discuss it with you. You can post here, at our message boards at www.kenzerco.com, or email me at noah@kenzerco.com. I hope you enjoy the player's guide as much as I enjoyed working on it. I value all of your opinions, good or bad, and I really do want to know what everyone thinks.
Psion, you make some interesting points. I'll see what I can do to address your comments, but of course, the final decisions and opinions are up to you.
1) All of our Kalamar products are supposed to go through WoTC's R&D department (for rules) and their art department (for art). I can only assume that they do this. I don't know what you mean by the SRD, so I can't comment on that.
2) I understand your comments about open game content and the d20 community, but I have to say I don't share the same fears about our products. I think we have shown a commitment to our Kingdoms of Kalamar line by producing a large number of supplements already, and we have no intention of slowing down. This means that the ideas in the player's guide will not remain stagnant. It is true that other companies can not adopt or expand on our rules, but WoTCs products are not open content either, and I don't think that has hampered the growth of their ideas. I think the main difference in your view and mine is that you view the fact that our products are not made by WoTC as a bigger deal than I do. If you think that means less quality or less support or less "officialness", then that is your opinion. I disagree, but I would rather have our products speak for me. I would encourage you to check out the player's guide and let me know what you think.
If anyone has concerns or questions about any of our products, I am happy to discuss it with you. You can post here, at our message boards at www.kenzerco.com, or email me at noah@kenzerco.com. I hope you enjoy the player's guide as much as I enjoyed working on it. I value all of your opinions, good or bad, and I really do want to know what everyone thinks.
Psion
Adventurer
Noah Kolman said:
This is important in understanding what I am talking about. And actually, I am somewhat astonished that there is someone working at a high profile d20 publisher that isn't aware of it.
The SRD = the system reference document, the body of work that WotC has released (or is going to release) as open game content.
Of course not. You are a publisher, not a consumer. However, being a publisher, you should take into account the concerns of consumers.
Okay, but can that possibly be matched by several publishers collectively working from the same concepts and strengthening the whole? I don't think so.
And is stating this, you betray your lack of knowledge about the SRD and WotC in general.
1) WotC has gone on record as saying that they will continue adding content from existing products to the SRD, and
2) WotC has gone on record that many of the releases that they put out this year will come with Open Game Content as is.
So in short, WotC is doing much more to add to the collective body of open work.
And as shown above, there is a reason for that. The main difference in our viewpoints is that
1) I realize that WotC is continuing to add to the body of open content, whereas Kenzer & Co. is not.
2) Given that unlike WotC, Kenzer is not cotributing anything to open content, I find its "official" designation as a meaningless one from a consumer standpoint. It status nets me less in a product that an unofficial one. I think Mr. Kenzer is pinning his hopes (and way too much of a licensing fee) on the official stamp. We could be having the same product as a d20 system product for much less.
Similar Threads
