OGL vs. non-OGL magazine

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think an OGL gaming magazine could easily be better than one limited to Wizards material, because I think the very best OGL material is better than the very best Wizards material (SW Saga Edition may change this - but post-Polyhedron, it's not like we would have seen anything for it anyway).

I'm not sure the market will SUPPORT an OGL gaming magazine, however.

 

[Ranger REG]

The news that Pathfinder will be OGL compatible is, IMHO, welcome news. Someone lamented the fact that it meant that Pathfinder no longer has access to print Eberron, or MMII or MMIII monsters anymore.

What does sadden me a bit with this news is that apparently Pathfinder is basing their modules solely on their own campaign world, potentially dismissing all the great 3rd party stuff out there. However, it likely will mean that 3rd party publishers could continue to contribute to that world, making it a rich environment in the long run.


So, where do you stand - are you generally more happy or more sad that Pathfinder will be OGL compatible?

Somewhat happy.

 

[Glyfair]

What I am sad about is that everyone who wants to run in Greyhawk, FR or Eberron is going to have to do their own conversions.

I'd say there is a reasonable chance that WotC plans to release Eberron (and FR) adventures as part of their "electronic initiative" program.

The problem is that this has a good chance of having a comparatively exorbitant cost. That assumes there is a single subscription fee for all the content we have learned they are contemplating (content similar to Paizo's magazines, character generator that can store 5-6 characters, other electronic tools). More than likely 2 months will cost more than a year's subscription to a single magazine.

 

[Grazzt]

So now with Necromancer being involved, will we see Tome of Horrors creatures included? There are a few hundred of those.

797 (or thereabouts) at last count.

 

[Erik Mona]

So now with Necromancer being involved, will we see Tome of Horrors creatures included? There are a few hundred of those.

I think this is as close to a certainty that something can be without being certain. I'm certainly interested in including monsters from the first Tome of Horrors that opened the back door to nearly every significant first edition TSR monster.

--Erik

 

[Nightfall]

Erik,

Sweet! I hope that means Demon Princes/Devils too. I'd LOVE to see an adventure path with Lucifier in it!

 

[Erik Mona]

I'm more interested in MM2, FF, FC1&II, etc monsters than 3rd party monsters (if that is even a remotely appropriate response to your question).

You'd be surprised (perhaps even shocked) by how many of those creatures are available to us via the first Tome of Horrors. It's really remarkable that Necromancer was allowed to use so much previously closed content., but it's frankly a benefit to the entire community of gamers and publishers, and one that hasn't been taken advantage of nearly enough.

As for demons and devils, I trust that 2/3s of the design team for FC1 can provide new monsters every bit as cool as the ones that are closed content.

--Erik

 

[Nightfall]

Erik,

I don't doubt that as you and James proved with Book of Fiends by Green Ronin.

Plus there's always "The Ebon Maw!"

 

[Grazzt]

...but it's frankly a benefit to the entire community of gamers and publishers, and one that hasn't been taken advantage of nearly enough.

--Erik

I agree. We should take advantage of it

 

[Nightfall]

No kidding. I want you, Erik and James to take advantage and BUST out some molds along with maybe busting up some "establishments."

Go Scott!