New GSL Announcement

[Fifth Element]

Guys, I think we need to take it down a notch before the mods step in and start dispensing harsh justice. Tempers are flaring a bit.

 

[Flynn]

Guys, I think we need to take it down a notch before the mods step in and start dispensing harsh justice. Tempers are flaring a bit.

Not only that, but we're less than fifty posts from having the thread locked anyway, so maybe you guys might want to consider taking this lively discussion to a new thread.

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Oldtimer]

Guys, I think we need to take it down a notch before the mods step in and start dispensing harsh justice. Tempers are flaring a bit.

Yes, you're right. I think I'll ease up on the caffeine and do something else for a while.

 

[Drow_Battlemind]

Well, as long as we're making stuff up, have you ever considered that this might also be a sample conversation at WotC, between game designers.

"Hey, do we wanna release 4E under the OGL?"
"Absolutely. Hey, wait, there's a fax coming in... it's from Hasbro, and it says we should drop the OGL like a bad habit, and stick it to everyone else in the industry."
"Seriously? But...I know a lot of those guys. I don't wanna do that to them."
"Yeah, but this memo is pretty clear. Anyone who doesn't follow these orders, and publicly support this idea, is fired."

Now, while this might not have happened, it COULD have. And I think one of the reasons the OGL isn't being supported is because of that behavior.

An idea I've tossed out on many a board. Well, three boards, anyway. I'm glad to know I'm not the only fan/gamer who's considered that this may be what's really going on behind the scenes. It's real easy to sharpen the pitchforks and light the torches and get a mob together roaring for Scott Rouse's blood, because he's the public face of WotC's D&D dept.
It's a bit harder to do so for "Faceless Hasbro Executive X", because F.H.E. X (IF he or she exists) has made sure that no-one outside the company knows his (or her) real name and that he/she handed the edict down. That is, if this scenario happens to be the correct one.

Absolutely.
And that is completely reasonable, 100% within their rights and makes total sense from their point of view.
<SNIP>
They can even put any strings they want in the GSL. Perfectly within their rights.

Yes, they have that right. And, it's even legal.
HOWEVER, that doesn't necessarily make it ETHICAL.
Which appears to be another point of contention between the two sides here.

 

[BryonD]

I don't think it's religious, and I can understand the concern, but I do believe those few who were saying they would rather the game be closed than have Wizards ask publishers to give up any products under the OGL are being short sighted and unfair to those publishers. It's sort of the Lady and Tiger story--the people who would rather Wizards close the system are like the ones who would choose the Tiger.

I don't think your assessment is in any way self-evident. To the contrary, I'd say putting one edition of D&D over the entirety of open gaming would be the short-sighted approach.

That said....

If the OGL is a strong movement, it will survive without the endorsement of WoTC, posion pill or not. If those publishers decide they'd rather do 4e, I guess it wasn't strong enough to survive. C'est LaVie

I do agree with you here. And, I expect a very strong portion of OGL community to survive.
But no credit goes to WotC for that. I'm in the camp that sees "attempted" crimes as no less objectionable than actual crimes, with failure being the only difference. This is by no stretch a crime, but the same reasoning applies.

 

[Piratecat]

Yes, you're right. I think I'll ease up on the caffeine and do something else for a while.

Thank you. John, you do the same.

No personal bickering, guys. Even when you disagree. You know that.

 

[BryonD]

Yes, they have that right. And, it's even legal.
HOWEVER, that doesn't necessarily make it ETHICAL.
Which appears to be another point of contention between the two sides here.

That is even further into purely subjective territory. but I don't think that I'd even go so far as to call in unethical.
I'm a on board with free market competition and all that. Yeah Capitalism!!!


But, this isn't some theoretical widget company in a Free Markets 101 course. The nature of the gaming community is significant in this issue. Being a "good guy" and going above and beyond is a smart move and WotC made that move before. I'm certain that some people will have a "4E is the universe" single issue view of this, and as such the ability to have 3PP stuff is a simple litmus test. For them any ability to publish makes WotC still a "good guy". For others I think simply moving away from "open" but going to a free license would be a backward step, but still clearly a good position. But, if open gaming is important, then it is easy to see how this one piece (and I'm still holding my breath hoping that much better news comes down in the clarifications) moves things into "bad guy" territory.

 

[BryonD]

Possibly when you start to Capitalise?

Gents - you've all been here before - you already know you're not going to convince each other, and it's already gotten to insults....

I mean I know that this thread is going to get locked and all shortly anyway, but unless you want it to go down in flames, perhaps there should be some cooling of tempers?

Now exactly how is that kind of shallow and meaningless jab supposed to support cooling tempers? Do you have an actual response of merit?

 

[xechnao]

What is immediately obvious to any publisher who has been paying attention since the first announcement, and who is familiar with the license, is that somebody at WotC, somebody in a position to set policy with respect to the OGL, does not understand it

The statements of press announcements and reality are two different things.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

The statements of press announcements and reality are two different things.

Never more apparent than recently.