OGC Wiki (merged)

[Piratecat]

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

Whether or not you agree with other members, please don't be rude to them. That's not appropriate, and it isn't going to help the thread. It's possible to get your opinion across without being insulting.

This is a subject folks feel strongly about, everyone. If you're tempted to post something personal, better to walk away from the keyboard for a while.

 

[mythusmage]

First let me say that Wulf Ratbane has a point re dilettants vs. hard workers. Putting your work on the line does make a difference.

As to losing sales because a product's OGC is readily available ...

Does the product have value added? Does it contain IP that increases its value? That makes it more than the OGC alone? Does the world know about this?

You'll always have people who will only deal with free stuff, what you need to go after are those ready to pay for stuff that has value added. You're doing a PDF of 12 Arcane Maps of Microbrew Pubs you can't keep it to the basic mechanics, you have to add some exposition that expands on the basic information and makes the PDF worth more than the OGC alone.

Suggested format: Separate instruction from description. For example.

Example Instructions: A Fireball does 1d6 damage per level of the caster to all within the area of effect. The upper limit to damage is 10d6. Those who mak a Fortitude save vs. a DC of 13 plus the caster's Intelligence bonus (if any) take half damage. Round all fractions down. A character's equipment is damaged should the character fail his save.

Example description: A Fireball creates a dome of flame that can set wood on fire, melt metals such as lead and gold, char leather, and may weaken iron and steel. A standard Fireball is a bright red in color, though different versions and iterations can range from a cool light blue, to an intense deep purple. Color depending on magic tradition and method of casting.

Hope this helps.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Does the product have value added? Does it contain IP that increases its value?

Example Instructions: A Fireball does 1d6 damage per level of the caster to all within the area of effect. The upper limit to damage is 10d6. Those who mak a Fortitude save vs. a DC of 13 plus the caster's Intelligence bonus (if any) take half damage. Round all fractions down. A character's equipment is damaged should the character fail his save.

Example description: A Fireball creates a dome of flame that can set wood on fire, melt metals such as lead and gold, char leather, and may weaken iron and steel. A standard Fireball is a bright red in color, though different versions and iterations can range from a cool light blue, to an intense deep purple. Color depending on magic tradition and method of casting.

My opinion-- and I suspect the opinion of a lot of my loyal customers, is that option B does NOT add value.

I'd rather see (and much rather provide) very clean, streamlined, usuable, accessible crunch.

As I said before, the product I reliably provide is clean mechanics.


Wulf

 

[HalWhitewyrm]

Marquis d'Sade True20

See, now that appeals to me.

As far as the OGC Wiki, as a player I think it would be cool. As a publisher, I'm afraid it would kill my nascent business. Personally speaking, I would probably be the first to probably use the free version rather than the paid (although I'm kinda weird, and I would probably end up buying the original after all, much like I prefer buying from iTunes than downloading from P2P networks), especially in really high-price items. If it was subscription based, and all donor publishers got a monthly royalty based on the amount of OGC added to the database, that would probably be more appealing to me.

Frankly, what would be most useful to me is to be able to know if OGC already exists for something I am working on, so I can evaluate it and decide if I like it, or if I want to fix it/design my own. Something like what Google Print is setting out to do would be excellent.

 

[KaosDevice]

Judging from the arguments I see here, why would any publisher in his or her right mind would include any OGC if it would allow them to fall prey to wiki distribution, etc. If the PDF market is fragile enough to be killed by a wiki (and this seems like a genie out of bottle situation) wouldn't the non-use of OGC protect it? I'm not trying to start any sort of argument, just curious.

 

[BryonD]

Judging from the arguments I see here, why would any publisher in his or her right mind would include any OGC if it would allow them to fall prey to wiki distribution, etc. If the PDF market is fragile enough to be killed by a wiki (and this seems like a genie out of bottle situation) wouldn't the non-use of OGC protect it? I'm not trying to start any sort of argument, just curious.

Instant market.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Judging from the arguments I see here, why would any publisher in his or her right mind would include any OGC if it would allow them to fall prey to wiki distribution, etc. If the PDF market is fragile enough to be killed by a wiki (and this seems like a genie out of bottle situation) wouldn't the non-use of OGC protect it?

Whether or not to use OGC isn't really a choice-- if you want to publish for d20, you're using (and almost always contributing) OGC.

Otherwise, it's an assessment of risk. There is a risk that someone will strip and distribute your OGC free of charge, of course, but that risk is not generally prohibitive to entering the d20 publishing "business."

A project like the d20 Wiki which proposes to act as a clearinghouse of freely downloadable OGC would require many publishers to reassess that risk.

 

[KaosDevice]

Otherwise, it's an assessment of risk. There is a risk that someone will strip and distribute your OGC free of charge, of course, but that risk is not generally prohibitive to entering the d20 publishing "business."

A project like the d20 Wiki which proposes to act as a clearinghouse of freely downloadable OGC would require many publishers to reassess that risk.

I would think precisely because of a threat like this I would be seriously migrating to a fluff over crunch stance (which I know isn't your gig.) as a way of staying in buisness. I would think Year of the Zombie would be one example of this, at least from my perspective. Maybe the companies that are more arcane with their listing of what is OGC as opposed to IP might have the right idea.

Although a searchable Wiki SRD sounds good to me, sorry to anyone who was putting out a version of the SRD.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I would think precisely because of a threat like this I would be seriously migrating to a fluff over crunch stance (which I know isn't your gig.)

Well, agreed, to a point.

But let's take a quick example: the Mass Combat system I did.

It's 8 pages of very streamlined crunch that addressed a need that had not really been satisfactorily addressed.

Are you suggesting that there should not be a market for that kind of Open Content?

The Mass Combat system isn't something that is particularly enhanced by fluffy prose.

 

[Yair]

I wonder if 4e will be released under an OGL 2.0.
The OGL is, from WotC's point of view, an instrument to enable third party publishers to use their system in ways that increase WotC's profitability. It clearly fails if it has a chilling effect on crunch use, for fear of extraction, and it also has a problem with the lack of ability to point out the original source (or is that a feature?). Maybe the OGL needs to be improved.

At any rate, it seems to me Wulf and Phil (and others) are basing their buisness model on the good will of the entire gaming community. Sooner or later, in my opinion, this faith is going to be broken. I personally value both their works, and wouldn't be the one to shatter this faith, but given time someone will. I'm not a professional, but it just doesn't seem like a viable buisness model.
Then again, I've been saying that for about a year now...
Until that day, at least we can all enjoy the great OGC they make.