Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orcus" data-source="post: 4694743" data-attributes="member: 1254">The license got changed because it was a failure and because people dont like failures. The GSL, as it originally existed, totally failed in all ways to get third parties to support 4E under that license. They werent afraid that people were supporting 4E with non-GSL created products. They took our comments to heart and made changes to make the license actually accomplish its stated goal--to get 3P support. Did they listen to us? Yes. The changes that came about are the direct result of my input and my proposed drafted changes. I sent Scott multiple versions of drafts and changes and he incoporated that stuff into his thinking that subsequently went to Wizards legal. The amount of OGL products for 4E is really not that significant right now. That wasnt bothering them. What bothered them is that they made this license and no one is using it. And people dont like doing somehting that just flat winds up sucking. They tried to make a good license, but what they made was a camel--a horse by committee. They tried to serve too many diverse masters in the first version and wound up serving none. So they took our input on what had to change. I told them what had to change. I told them we need an opt out and we need section 6 to go away. I also included some "wish list" items such as monster stat blocks. We got our mandatory stuff, didnt get our wish list stuff. And there you have it. Listen, I worked directly with Scott on a good amount of this stuff. In the end it is his work, but this was based on feedback from the publsihers because they want a license people will actually use. They dont want a failure. And that is what the GSL was--a total abject failure. Now it isnt. And I hope to see all the prior larger 3E publishers on board--I'd love to see GR use it, I'd love to see Monte raise Malhavoc and use it, etc. And I hope they will. Now, there is little reason not to. Clark</blockquote>

Verification