"Quality Standards" in the d20 System Guide

[KingOfChaos]

I have already decided to use the D20 STL on my 'tamer' products that I know fall within the accepted quality standards and just publishing under the OGL for the darker concepts. Good thing is, some of the products will have the logo and some won't, but they'll be in the same series of products and should be recognized as such.

 

[buzz]

But I really do believe in this product - and for those who are interested in adding elements of romance, love, seduction, birth, marriage etc. etc.

...as well as pictures of hot chicks with knotted rope in their hindquarters .

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

 

[buzz]

It does not matter if WotC doesn't intend to enforce it this way. They have dictated that they can.

This is really the main point in all of this hubub: what is WotC actually going to *do* with these new rights?

BoEF will likely be the litmus test, seeing as it's probably going to be one of the most "provocative" RPG products the industry has yet seen. If WotC does little more than demand Valar take the D&D brand name off of future printings or tell them to go OGL, then I'm not too worried. Barring the publication of FATAL d20 or RAHOWA d20, noting else I've seen on the market comes even close to pushing as many buttons as BoEF, so the d20 industry will be safe.

Otherwise, well, then it could be a bad thing. Still, the worst I can see things getting is still light years better than life under TSR and 2e.

 

[Voadam]

That's fine, but a publisher is using WotC's license and their trademarks. They aren't entitled to them. It's not a god-given right that they can use them. So, if a publisher doesn't want WotC to dictate quality standards to them (which is rapidly sounding like an imagined witch hunt more than anything else), they can use the OGL.



Which leads me to a question: Can anyone name some products which are compatible with d20 but are part of the OGL...not the d20STL? Arcana Unearthed and Everquest (I think) spring to mind, but I'm not sure what else?

Engel and Mutants and Masterminds I think, and I'm not sure about BESM d20 or their srd. M&M is a bit of a compatibility stretch with its damage saves, etc.

 

[d4]

Anyway, if you want to have porno, or loads of sexual perversion in your home brew, there is nothing stopping you from it. I doubt that WotC is going to show up during your games and make you stop playing.

from what i've seen, the BoEF does not fulfill any legal definition of pornography as i know it. perhaps Anthony can give us a better indication of this.

so can we please stop with the porno references?

just because you think certain things are icky doesn't give you the right to call it pornography or "perversion."

 

[ACValterra]

[/b]

If you knew these license changes were going to happen. What is the motivation for your doing several different things...

1. Putting out a press release indicating compatibility with Dungeons and Dragons and SEX.

Because it is compatible with D&D and it does cover sex? And as I stated above I believed and still do that a press release does not constitute marketing. And finally I have said it was crappy press release that I regret.

[/b]
2. Putting the words "Dungeons and Dragons" in a prominant place on your book.

The license demands that I put that text on my book. The purpose of that text is to let the world know that this product requires you to have, and be conversant, with D&D. In the original license that text was optional. The assumption on our part was that everyone would put the text as prominantly as they could on their products. When people didn't use the text it became mandatory. We wanted people to promote D&D on their products. That is what I did. From the very beginning Ryan Dancey said - eventually there will be a d20 product that covers sex or the Klu Klux Klan - our defense is that we have no oversite or control over content of products. That has obviously changed.

[/b]
3. Putting out a product that you knew was going to be dissallowed according to the license.

Well I was hoping to have it out *before* the license change.

[/b]
In other words, why did you push the envelope so hard and fast when you knew what was going to happen? I understand the frustration you must have felt watching something you believe it get the shaft. I don't understand why, once the battle was lost, you didn't respond gracefully. Why you pretty much did everything possible under the liscense to manipulate it for your product's benefit. I can only believe these things, given your knowledge both of the license change, the OGL movement, and of WotC internal information are a deliberate "thumbing of the nose" at WotC for their decision concerning the license changes. I'm worried that this behavior may lead to even more extreme "clamping down" on the license in the future.

joe b.

I think there is an underlying assumption I am mising in this. Why wouldn't I do everything I could to get this product out and into the hands of the consumer? And why is that "thumbing my nose". I care about this product. I think its a great product that is useful and will sell well. I want as many consumers as possible to look through it and decide for themselves cause I think alot of them will buy it. I'm a business man. I didn't do this product out of spite or revenge I did it because I beleive in it and its a product I've wanted to do since I was in college. I just had the realization last March that it was "now or never".
AV

 

[Dr. Harry]

I guess it's a case of plausible denial. Before now, they could say the mark denoted game rule compatability only and that there were far too many products for them to be able to exercise editorial control of content. Now, they've extended the mark to include content, so they don't have that out.

The example I've seen lately is that once you post a "beware of dog" sign, you can be sure the opposition attorney will say something like "So you KNEW your dog was dangerous long before he bit little Timmy!?"

People who don't like D&D will associate it with all sorts of unrelated things, with or without reason (remember the early '80s?). I'm not sure that the extra risk and liability is worth it.

-Dave

I agree that in a legal sense this position undermines any attempt at plausible deniability (and adds some level of risk to WotC), but that legal plausible denaibility would have been largely unimportant in the court of public relations in any event.

Consider the release of a product that with a treatment of a sensitive subject matter in such a way as to offend many people, and raise the topic to a wider audience than just gamers. Under the last STL, WotC could only say "Sorry. The mark only denotes compatibility." True, but not helpful from a PR sense. After the STL, WotC can now say, "Why yes, that is offensive. Here, see how responsible we are being by taking action ourselves." and forcing the product to ditch the d20.

The new STL does not (I think) indicate that WotC will be "going after" other companies in the general or the specific, but that if another game company publishes a product that draws a reaction, you're on your own...

It is understandable why the first assumptions linked this directly with the BoEF, and it turns out that it is true - just in the opposite sense. It was not WotC trying to switch their policy to slap down Valar, it is Valar slapping at WotC by racing to finish a product (as d20) that uses the letter of the STL to flog the general working understanding of the STL, and intentionally racing to finish a product that AV has *known* would violate the new STL.

Yeah, I've been playing D&D since the early 80's, I was here for all of that mess, and it helped a lot when defending the game that the incindiary charges against it were untrue.

 

[20sides]

My main concern is where does the line get drawn for a company that routinely produces d20 products?

For example, if I were to submit something that WOTC didn't feel was representative of the d20 product guidelines to Mystic Eye for publishing, would it affect their status on their other d20 products?

If it does, I would say that this is an effort by WOTC to begin curbing material from independent writers/publishers and increase its own market share.

 

[ACValterra]

From what I have heard, I would not be at all surprised if we didn't see another product with pictures with as much violent content and nudity and the BoVD, or even the Urban Arcana or MM 3.5. From statements by Andy @ WotC and Anthony here, this move does not seem to be isolated to the d20 STL, but a more general move to exercise standards associated with WotC. I am guessing you will see these revisions affect WotC product as well, so I think the hipocrisy claim will be moot.

Wanna lay some money on that? Check out Book of Exalted Deeds in October.

AV

 

[BSF]

It is very easy for me, as a small publisher and a regular visitor here at ENworld, to remember this most important fact of this business:

You guys aren't my customers.

I mean, ultimately you are, but more importantly, my customers are the distributors and retailers. You can vow to support me all you want (and believe me, it is appreciated) but if the distributor won't carry my products, you're never even going to have the option of supporting me, or any of the many fine smaller d20 publishers.

So remember: Talking to your friends is great, but hounding your local game store is even better.

Someone else just above mentioned that the d20 logo isn't that important-- that their purchases are made based on reviews and word of mouth here at ENworld. As much as I wish it were otherwise, this is a very small niche of extremely informed gamers, and a tiny portion of the "market" that a publisher must consider.


Wulf

Wulf,
I appreciate your posting. It was something that I had _meant_ to mention, but got lost in writing a response while at work.

Also, I don't really have many good game stores around locally. I mean, I have had to explain to some proprieters who/what Malhavoc Press is, that they are distributed by White Wolf and that they have products compatible with DnD.

With people like that in the market, I am sometimes amazed that any of you can get shelf space!

Back to the topic: Yes, if you have a local game store, help educate them on the fine 3rd Party companies out there. Educate your friends. Educate the weird gaming geeks you see at your FLGS.

OK, maybe we don't all need to be evangelists out there. But, if you want to convince your FLGS to carry something, you have to show them that there is a business need to do it.

Or, if they are DnD geeks as well, just show them how cool it is to post here and talk to the people that make this stuff!!