OGL? SUccess or failure?

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I think we're going to see a gleaning in the d20 marketplace, over time, as people finally settle down and begin to COMPILE for creations instead of wholesale rewriting of rules.

I think Grim Tales illustrates that, in some ways, as it took directly from the d20Modern SRD for a great majority of its rulebase, then from the d20 core SRD for some more rules, a few hand-created rules, a few tweaks, and a presentation which performs splendidly without re-inventing the wheel.

For myself, when I'm creating, I don't attempt to re-invent the wheel with mechanics ... I look for existing mechanics that work as I want them to, or work with very minor changes to them. If I were to begin publishing, it would be works like this.

Honestly, I think we'll find that the glut of d20 OGL products today will form the soil in which to grow masterful creations later, as talented writers swim in the effluvia of rules and pick things up here and there and elsewhere ... not that the best products will necessarily rise like cream to the top to be skimmed for perfect products ... occassionally the "best" of any particular genre is not what it takes to inspire the next paradigm.

--fje

 

[Storm Raven]

You might have a case from the standpoint of a gamer, but companies have to be on their toes regarding these things. They sometimes react on rumours or gut feelings, and they often have to, if they have too much money invested in a market that can be torn away from under their feet on short notice. I just mentioned Mongoose's Matthew Sprange and Runequest, because he is one of those people who will, when asked to answer the question "When will we see D&D 4.0? Sooner or later?", opt for "sooner". He said as much, and he's acting according to this opinion.

And? Somehow I don't see the cause for panic here. WotC might publish a 4.0 version of the game. Big deal. The current version of the OGL will still be out there, and 4e won't be so incompatible that it will make things impossible to work under it.

This is just one example that illustrates that imagined changes can have real consequences. Keep up your "The sky is falling" joke. You might be right with your opinion that D&D 4.0 is still years ahead and we don't have to bother about the question whether it will be OGL or not. This doesn't change much about the fact that some companies already adjust their strategy for this possibility now.

It doesn't matter if 4.0 is published tomorrow or in 2525, the impact will be the same regardless - negligible. You can get all hyped up on conspiracy theories about how it will be published without an OGL, but WotC would be silly to do that - they would be killing their own market by doing that amoung other things. Even if they do, the OGL for 3/3.5 will still be available, and there is no way that 4e could be so radically different from the current version as to make products unfeasible under that version. Really, if you (and some game publishers) want to run around like chickens with your heads cut off, be my guest. But in the end, I suspect that all the wailing and gnashing of teeth will turn out to have been pointless.

 

[Turjan]

And? Somehow I don't see the cause for panic here. WotC might publish a 4.0 version of the game. Big deal. The current version of the OGL will still be out there, and 4e won't be so incompatible that it will make things impossible to work under it.

Good that you know how 4e will be. And nobody shows panic here . I found my analysis quite level-headed . Plus, everybody knows that you can use the 3.5 OGL ad infinitum. It's a perpetual license. Without market value per se .

It doesn't matter if 4.0 is published tomorrow or in 2525, the impact will be the same regardless - negligible.

Quite the opposite. All product sporting a 3.5 OGL will be immediatley reduced to zero market value. You don't have to speculate about this; it's exactly what happened when the change from 3.0 to 3.5 was done. Only a few publishers survived that debacle, and the d20 market broke down.

You can get all hyped up on conspiracy theories about how it will be published without an OGL, but WotC would be silly to do that - they would be killing their own market by doing that amoung other things.

The WotC market is nearly completely uncoupled from the rest of the d20 publishers. Their publishing decisions don't take d20 products into account, because they don't matter much to them. They hoped for some synergy effects that they didn't get (see their lament about the lack of adventures from d20 companies) and got competition in areas where they didn't want to have it (all those OGL standalone products). I don't know how they will decide about an OGL for 4.0, but this is not a no-brainer decision.

Even if they do, the OGL for 3/3.5 will still be available, and there is no way that 4e could be so radically different from the current version as to make products unfeasible under that version.

Right, you can go on with them. The only problem is that it's pointless to cater to extremely small niche markets, except - maybe - as a pdf only publisher.

 

[Ranger REG]

Wow. With all this talk about concern relating to the 4e's arrival and possible impact toward the Trademark License, you make d20 Modern look like a footnote.

 

[philreed]

Wow. With all this talk about concern relating to the 4e's arrival and possible impact toward the Trademark License, you make d20 Modern look like a footnote.

I think D20 Modern is a footnote.

 

[wedgeski]

One of the largest differences in open source programming (such as with linux) as compared with open source in gaming is that there is no central control. With linux, you have Linus Torvolds and a hand-picked group deciding what gets added and what doesn't. There is no such control with open source gaming. In short, it was a free-for-all. There still isn't any control to speak of, no review process for mechanics, etc.. And no, I do not consider consumers as a control in this.

Linux is only one open source project, though. Open programming as a whole runs the gamut of operating systems, projects, developers, and ranges of quality (and value). It just so happens that the headline project is supervised and governed by a guiding authority who most contributors trust to do what is right for the project as a whole (for the most part).

Download 100 random projects off SourceForge (for those who don't know, an on-line support system for developing, debugging, and distributing software) and you'll probably find a similar quality curve as if you downloaded 100 d20 products at random off RPGNow.

The only solution to the quality conundrum is to introduce a review or standards body to any new license, and we all know what kind of a fuss that would cause (not to mention dramatically devaluing the license itself). Personally I don't think the issue is serious enough to warrant such a change.

 

[Hussar]

Just a thought about 4e not being OGL.

Take a look at the recent WW debacle over licensing. The reaction was instant and crushing. To the point where the idea got squashed extremely quickly. What do you think would be the fan reaction to an announcement that 4e will be non-OGL? Somehow I think it would be very, very similar.

To make 4e non-OGL would be a terrible mistake IMO. One of the greatest strengths of the current edition has been the OGL. It has allowed competition to refine and polish the companies that survived the 3e to 3.5 transition. Sure, there's lots of crap out there, but, then again, there always was. Just before, the crap was all published by the same company, now it's published by 50 or so.

I really can't see how it can be argued that the OGL has been less than an unqualified success. The huge resurgeance of the hobby in the last 5 years can certainly be attributed, at least in part, to the OGL. The fact that umpteen companies now advertise DnD, even if its only their brand of it, can only help WOTC.

Sure, there's lots of games being published under the OGC. But, then again, back in the day, there were a bazillion games published that directly competed with TSR. It never really mattered. DnD steamrolled them all. So what if you play True Rose? Chances are, you've also bought a PHB at one point or another, even if it was just to mine ideas.

So long as WOTC controls the three core books, the OGC is just going to keep making money for them. Everyone else is bringing in players into roleplaying and, eventually, just because of numbers, those numbers get introduced to DnD.

Just a couple of cents.

 

[Storm Raven]

Good that you know how 4e will be. And nobody shows panic here . I found my analysis quite level-headed . Plus, everybody knows that you can use the 3.5 OGL ad infinitum. It's a perpetual license. Without market value per se .

It would be virtually impossible for WotC to publish a version of D&D that was wildly different from the one they have now. It would simply disrupt their own market too much. The publication of 3.0 was possible because of a market situation unlikely to be replicated any time soon (the death of the publisher of D&D). That situation created an environment where a major overhaul was not only viable, but seen as needed by a large proportion of the gaming community.

Quite the opposite. All product sporting a 3.5 OGL will be immediatley reduced to zero market value. You don't have to speculate about this; it's exactly what happened when the change from 3.0 to 3.5 was done. Only a few publishers survived that debacle, and the d20 market broke down.

It was reduced to zero market value because an alternative was open to third party publishers, the 3.5 OGL. Without that they could have still published 3.0 material and advertised it as compatible. Companies in the past, before the OGL, did exactly that. TSR got itself into a tizzy about it, and drove them out of that business (i.e. Mayfair and Judges Guild), but WotC would be hamstrung on that score by the 3.5 OGL.

The WotC market is nearly completely uncoupled from the rest of the d20 publishers. Their publishing decisions don't take d20 products into account, because they don't matter much to them. They hoped for some synergy effects that they didn't get (see their lament about the lack of adventures from d20 companies) and got competition in areas where they didn't want to have it (all those OGL standalone products). I don't know how they will decide about an OGL for 4.0, but this is not a no-brainer decision.

When everything gets boiled down, it is a no brainer for them. They may lose some sales at the margins to standalone OGL products, but those products are going to need the PHB, which is a WotC product, and at this point mostly profit for them. WotC would be damaged by a contraction of the RPG market, because they depend on a large, active volume of gamers to support their lines - and if they cut off other sources of product, then gamers will likely move away from the hobby, just as happened when games dried up in the 1990s. WotC killing the OGL would likely return the hobby to the status of the 1990s, and that would be slitting their own throats.

Right, you can go on with them. The only problem is that it's pointless to cater to extremely small niche markets, except - maybe - as a pdf only publisher.

Like I said: the sky is falling.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

They may lose some sales at the margins to standalone OGL products, but those products are going to need the PHB, which is a WotC product, and at this point mostly profit for them.

Actually, to be specific, standalone OGL products do not need the PHB. They supercede the PHB by inclusion of material that products under the d20 license cannot include.

 

[Turjan]

I really can't see how it can be argued that the OGL has been less than an unqualified success. The huge resurgeance of the hobby in the last 5 years can certainly be attributed, at least in part, to the OGL. The fact that umpteen companies now advertise DnD, even if its only their brand of it, can only help WOTC.

Sure, there's lots of games being published under the OGC. But, then again, back in the day, there were a bazillion games published that directly competed with TSR. It never really mattered. DnD steamrolled them all. So what if you play True Rose? Chances are, you've also bought a PHB at one point or another, even if it was just to mine ideas.

In principle, I agree completely with you. From a player's point of view, the OGL was a tremendous success, because the exchange of ideas for the game was much broader and more efficient than ever before. I also think that WotC profited immensely from the OGL over the years, regarding both, their public image and absolute sales. I'm not 100% sure, though, whether this is still the case nowadays, in 2005. I don't know WotC's business strategy for the next years, and I don't know how the OGL fits in there in the long run. It's this uncertainty that makes me less sure that the answer to the question whether D&D 4.0 will include an OGL or not will be an unqualified "Yes". Please, don't take my last post as an announcement like "D&D 4.0 will come in 2006 and it will not include an OGL!" . I just noted that some people with large game companies see this as a valid possibility .