Pramas on the OGL

[Seanchai]

I think OGL is MUCH more important in the 4E era than it was in 3E because of how fractured D&D could become given the very mixed reception that 4E has got so far.

3e got the same reception. People hated it. Hated the idea of it. Said it was nothing but a MMO. Swore they'd never play it.

Then they bought it and played it.

Then, when the next edition was announced, they started defending it.

Seanchai

 

[Seanchai]

I'd assume his opinion on the OGL hasn't changed.

In other words, the only direct quotes we have are over two years old. It's a sly bit of work, making it seem as if Cook had weighed in on recent events, but he hasn't. His opinion might be the same. It might not.

Seanchai

 

[trancejeremy]

3e got the same reception. People hated it. Hated the idea of it. Said it was nothing but a MMO. Swore they'd never play it.

Then they bought it and played it.

Then, when the next edition was announced, they started defending it.

Seanchai

I don't think that's true, though. Certainly not how I remember it anyway. Heck, this site wouldn't exist if not for people clamoring for news about the new 3rd edition. It basically sprung up from nothing, into one of the major RPGs sites. There was nothing equivalent for it for 2e (or 4e, for that matter)

And beyond that, there were a lot of people excited about WOTC moving in a different direction (openess) than TSR did, especially towards fans (and fan material), which had alienated a lot of people. Now that WOTC is basically no more, a subsidiary of Hasbro, and they seem to be backpeddling on openess. Which will alienate those people who remember the TSR C&D days.

 

[BryonD]

3e got the same reception. People hated it. Hated the idea of it. Said it was nothing but a MMO. Swore they'd never play it.

Then they bought it and played it.

Then, when the next edition was announced, they started defending it.

Seanchai

I was there.
There were certainly detractors. But it was NOTHING like this now. Particularly 2 months before the release.

As 3E approached, people got on board more and more. As 4E approaches people just become more entrenched.

I think this is creative distortion of history. Major distortion.

 

[BryonD]

Actually, in his very next column he discusses his predictions for the future.

Crap. I'd forgotten that one. He pretty well nailed it. I found this line interesting from current PoV.

Arguably, to make the game airtight-closed, Wizards would have to change it so radically that it wouldn't even be D&D anymore.

 

[DaveMage]

As 3E approached, people got on board more and more. As 4E approaches people just become more entrenched.

This is me.

 

[Orcus]

This is me.

There was also a crying need for 3E--or atleast for some update to the game. 2E from 1E wasnt much in the way of an upgrade. The rules, since AD&D, hadnt really changed. And TSR had fallen off the map, essentially. They werent creating much of value. D&D NEEDED that new edition to energize it. That is not so today, not by a long shot. Now, that doesnt mean I am not excited about 4E. I am. But there isnt the same burning need for it with a vast majority of gamers as there was for 3E. That, in my view, is all the more reason to allow third parties to support the transition to 4E.

 

[Dark Mistress]

There was also a crying need for 3E--or atleast for some update to the game. 2E from 1E wasnt much in the way of an upgrade. The rules, since AD&D, hadnt really changed. And TSR had fallen off the map, essentially. They werent creating much of value. D&D NEEDED that new edition to energize it. That is not so today, not by a long shot. Now, that doesnt mean I am not excited about 4E. I am. But there isnt the same burning need for it with a vast majority of gamers as there was for 3E. That, in my view, is all the more reason to allow third parties to support the transition to 4E.

Big Daddy Orcus you should know by now, you're not allowed to post logical well thought out posts on the internet. You have to over react and run around screaming or make wild claims as facts. It's a fact no one will pay attention to you unless you do.

 

[Orcus]

Very funny, DM!

Everyone -- Wizards representatives included -- should read this column by Monte Cook:

http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mc_los_155

I;m not sure how a person could be more right.

Monte is a great guy. It was my pleasure to work in the same group of companies with him. He really knows the "industry" (such as it is). Frankly, equally brilliant and way below the radar is his wife, Sue, who is fantastic, too.

My sense is a decision point is coming soon. I think it would do everyone well to read that article. I sure hope people from Wizards read it.

Regardless of when it comes, however, the issue at hand is: Will 4th Edition continue to be an open game? This is a complex question. I suspect that as the Wizards revolving door continues to toss out more and more of the so-called "old guard" (willingly or unwillingly), fewer people remain who believe in or even really understand the Open Game License. There are people at Wizards, for example, that think of companies like Malhavoc as competitors, not as licensees. There may be a desire on such people's part to close it all up again.

Even if that happens, however, the better question is, could they? Let me point out that the OGL is pretty much irrevocable. Companies could continue to produce books compatible with 3rd Edition, or with OGL games like Arcana Evolved, Spycraft, or Mutants and Masterminds. And even if Wizards took away the d20 license and didn't update the SRD, if 4th Edition still used hit points, Armor Class, six ability scores 3-18, and so on, it would be easy enough to create material under the existing OGL pretty compatible with 4th Edition. Arguably, to make the game airtight-closed, Wizards would have to change it so radically that it wouldn't even be D&D anymore.*

So, I see interesting times ahead. Whether it comes in 2007, 2008, 2009, or whenever, when a new edition of the game comes along, I suspect you'll see RPG companies continue to support 3.0/3.5 with OGL products. I suspect you'll see companies with OGL games continue to support them under their existing rules. And I suspect you'll see companies attempt to produce products that are compatible with 4th Edition, whether Wizards wants them to or not.

Will this be good for Wizards? Probably not. The smartest thing they can do for their own good is to make 4th Edition open, so that it can get a lot of support. Otherwise, suddenly the OGL works against them rather than for them. (Arguably, the negative impact might be small -- it's difficult to tell--but the positive influence would certainly be gone.)

My guess is there are those at Wizards who want to close 4E. And some may even point at Paizo's choice to do Pathfinder as "more evidence they should close 4E." That would be, in my view, a misunderstanding of the dynamics of the OGL and would be a mistake.

Monte said it well: "The smartest thing they can do for their own good is to make 4th Edition open, so that it can get a lot of support. Otherwise, suddenly the OGL works against them rather than for them. (Arguably, the negative impact might be small -- it's difficult to tell--but the positive influence would certainly be gone.)"

In the end, that is probably a good way to sum things up.

I hope I am right that this is coming to a decision soon. I also hope that people who make the decision take the advice of people who were there and who were a part of it and who are well respected in this area. And I mean Monte, by the way. I'd like to include me in that group, but since I never worked for Wizards I dont know how my opinion is viewed.

Clark

 

[SSquirrel]

I don't think that's true, though. Certainly not how I remember it anyway. Heck, this site wouldn't exist if not for people clamoring for news about the new 3rd edition. It basically sprung up from nothing, into one of the major RPGs sites. There was nothing equivalent for it for 2e (or 4e, for that matter)

Of course you have to remember that most people knew nothing of the internet prior to 1995. By the time 3E got announced in 1999, the Internet was huge business and this was the first edition change w/a mainstream chunk of society all wired. There was nothing like this previously simply b/c there wasn't much of a structure or population for it. With 4E there wasn't a need to create a site like Eric Noah did for the rollout of 3E, this site already existed. It has still been the home for all new 3.x related, but it also automatically became the home for any and all news that was 4E related.

Now if you're really meaning there was no clamoring for information on 4E, but I think that is completely false. It had been predicted often by various people (including Monte as shown in other posts) and while there was a lot of griping about it being "too soon" for a new edition (I was one of them), this whole last year has been nothing but trying to eke out every ounce of information about the game that we can. You have petitions from fans in the 4E forum begging for things like the errata to the DDXP characters so people can keep testing the system more accurately. You have insane amounts of debates, arguments, catcallings and kickouts in edition war threads or even just people disagreeing VERY strongly about certain aspects of 4E and whether they were needed etc.

ENWorld appears to be the automatic home for D&D news for the forseeable future. We have designers like Clark, Pramas, Monte, Ari , Wulf and others all swing by at least semi-regularly giving their 2 cents on subjects. We have WotC folks who sometimes seemingly post more here than they do on WotC's own forums. I can remember finding the original site back in late '99 and being so glad I could just focus in on one website for this information.