D&D 5E So, 5e OGL

[Jester David]

The other big they are waiting for is to codify the DMG and get that on lockdown (which they just did). They absolutely didn't want 3pp developers to try to create content without the DMG locked down and MM locked down and even looked at and fixed if need be. The 3pp developers would all have engaged in a contest to get their content out first in order to sell more products, which would have probably negatively affected the content itself and contributed to unnecessary power creep / bloat.

And that is an excellent reason not to have the OGL take effect until a few months after the DMG is released.
However, they could still talk about what it entails. Heck, they could even release it and let people work on content they cannot legally release for several months. Or release a draft and let people look at it and give feedback, playtest style.

 

[Cybit]

And that is an excellent reason not to have the OGL take effect until a few months after the DMG is released.
However, they could still talk about what it entails. Heck, they could even release it and let people work on content they cannot legally release for several months. Or release a draft and let people look at it and give feedback, playtest style.

...I think the issue might (speculation alert) be that Hasbro is the one they need to go work things out with before they can go into detail.

 

[Jester David]

...I think the issue might (speculation alert) be that Hasbro is the one they need to go work things out with before they can go into detail.

That's my thoughts exactly.

--correction--
I actually think Hasbro will be easier to convince. They'll go into the meeting dismissive of D&D as the "other" WotC brand, the one that doesn't make them almost a billion dollars each year. Their concern won't be sales lost, but the Intellectual Property, the stuff they can leverage into movies and television franchises. As long as they're reassured D&D isn't losing control over its ideas they should be fine.

The hard part is convincing the WotC upper management who will be worried about the books not selling and the line suffering. That's much trickier.

 

[Cybit]

That's my thoughts exactly.

--correction--
I actually think Hasbro will be easier to convince. They'll go into the meeting dismissive of D&D as the "other" WotC brand, the one that doesn't make them almost a billion dollars each year. Their concern won't be sales lost, but the Intellectual Property, the stuff they can leverage into movies and television franchises. As long as they're reassured D&D isn't losing control over its ideas they should be fine.

The hard part is convincing the WotC upper management who will be worried about the books not selling and the line suffering. That's much trickier.

I can say that I'm pretty sure WotC upper management (mearls & co) are on board. I think Hasbro will be the harder sell. I think they'll probably put some wording in that would limit folks to not creating a whole new system based on 5E; but allow smaller products / adventures. Though I wonder if the bloat issue is big enough that they are careful about allowing player option content.

 

[aramis erak]

I suspect the OGL we get will not be the full "open core the whole PHB" approach. I expect the open content will be limited to chapters 1 (basic overview), 5 (Equipment), 7 (Using Ability Scores), 8 (Adventuring), 9 (Combat) and maybe 10. I expect a GSL-like SRD for the other chapters - allowed references, but not actual rules.

I would expect a GSL-like treatment of the MM. Reference data including only certain elements.

I would also expect a DMG reference to include only the rules portions, not the magic items, as open content, and even then, not all of them.

 

[Jester David]

I can say that I'm pretty sure WotC upper management (mearls & co) are on board. I think Hasbro will be the harder sell. I think they'll probably put some wording in that would limit folks to not creating a whole new system based on 5E; but allow smaller products / adventures. Though I wonder if the bloat issue is big enough that they are careful about allowing player option content.

Mearls isn't upper management. He's the brand manager for D&D. Which is essentially a department manager. He likely has a manager above him who manages, who has a general manager above him, who reports to the CEO. It's getting all the middle and upper management on board that's tricky.

 

[Morrus]

Mearls isn't upper management. He's the brand manager for D&D.

No he's not. The brand manager is Nathan Stewart.

 

[Jester David]

No he's not. The brand manager is Nathan Stewart.

Huh. Did that change? I thought Mearls took over for Bill Slavicsek when the latter left WotC back in 2011.

 

[Morrus]

Huh. Did that change? I thought Mearls took over for Bill Slavicsek when the latter left WotC back in 2011.

Bill Slavicsek was never the brand manager, either. He was Director R&D. Previous brand managers were Scott Rouse, and Charles Ryan.

Here's a list:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showwiki.php?title=Ex-WotC-Employees

 

[Jester David]

Bill Slavicsek was never the brand manager, either. He was Director R&D. Previous brand managers were Scott Rouse, and Charles Ryan.

Here's a list:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showwiki.php?title=Ex-WotC-Employees

Damn, I hate getting my terms wrong. I feel shame.

Wait... in a department of twelve people, a third are managers?
<insert Office Space reference here.>