Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pawsplay" data-source="post: 4030960" data-attributes="member: 15538">The OGL was too permissive, eh? It seems to me that really, you're made at WotC for not following your vision of how things should be done. The ownership of ideas is just not workable. I don't think anyone really knows yet what will work. I think the consensus is that the OGL was good for third parties and WotC both, that it created a lot of goodwill and protected all parties from needless litigation. If you want to argue against that, you're going to have an uphill battle. I don't think 4e is ultimately intended to be that "closed" anyway. I suspect that WotC simply feels they need to retrench their market share, and that they can convince the industry to play ball with them for about two years in order to bolster's 4e's bottom line. I imagine that in the long run you will be able to do just about anything other than write a Mutants & Masterminds.And in the long run, games like M&M have plenty to work from with the OGL we have now. The thing that bothers me is the potential landmine if someone strays a little too close to the 4e design. I hope that WotC would have the good sense to not go off half-cocked and allow a reasonable remedy if infringement were claimed, but I know from my time in the corporate world that the legal team sometimes acts independently from other segments in a company.</blockquote>